中心静脉导管闭式引流治疗自发性气胸的临床分析  

Clinical Analysis of Treating Spontaneous Pneumothorax Through Thoracic Close Drainage of the Central Venous Catheter

作　　者：许萍[1] 徐春燕[1] 刘晓静[1] 李平[1] 周胜亮[1] 韩飚[1] 陈琛[1] 

机构地区：[1]南昌大学第四附属医院呼吸内科,南昌330003

出　　处：《实用临床医学（江西）》2007年第10期22-24,共3页Practical Clinical Medicine

摘　　要：目的:探讨中心静脉导管闭式引流治疗自发性气胸的临床效果。方法:采用美国ARROW公司生产的中心静脉导管对自发性气胸患者进行胸腔闭式引流并与粗硅胶管组进行比较,治疗组30例自发性气胸患者行中心静脉导管闭式引流,对照组27例行粗硅胶管闭式引流,观察疗效及并发症。结果:治疗组总有效率93.3%,对照组总有效率96.3%,中心静脉导管与粗硅胶管行胸腔闭式引流治疗自发性气胸疗效相近,无显著性差异(P>0.05);但粗硅胶管行胸腔闭式引流治疗并发症多,镇痛药使用率高(51.9%)。结论:中心静脉导管行闭式引流治疗自发性气胸是一种痛苦小,并发症少,住院费用少,操作简单,舒适耐受的方法。Objective：To summarize the clinical effective in treating the spontaneous pneumothorax of using central venous catheter. Methods：The curative effects and complications in treating the spontaneous pneumothorax by thoracic close drainage of central venous catheter （made by ARROW company in USA）with by coarse silica gel catheter were compared. Thirty cases of spontaneous pneumothorax had the thoracic close drainage of the central venous catheter,while twentyseven cases in the same condition had the thoracic close drainage of the coarse silica gel catheter. Results：In treat group total effective rate was 93.3% ,while in control group total effective rate was 96.3%. Their curative effects were similar without obvious differences, but the thoracic close drainage of the coarse silica gel catheter had more complications and higher usage of pain relief medicine. Conclusion： The treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax through the thoracic close drainage of the central venous catheter is satisfactory remedy with fewer complications and cost of hospitalization. It is more simple and comfortable.

关 键 词：自发性气胸 中心静脉导管 胸腔引流 

分 类 号：R561.4[医药卫生—呼吸系统]