植入式静脉输液港在恶性肿瘤化疗中的应用  

Value of implantable venous port access in chemotherapy for malignant tumors

作　　者：尧伟[1] 袁艺[1] 丘爱平[1] 

机构地区：[1]广州医学院附属肿瘤医院胃肠外科,广东广州510095

出　　处：《广州医学院学报》2011年第6期52-54,共3页Academic Journal of Guangzhou Medical College

摘　　要：目的:比较植入式静脉输液港(VPA)与外周置入中心静脉导管在恶性肿瘤化疗中的应用效果。方法:回顾性分析2009年4月至2011年7月广州医学院附属肿瘤医院收治的105例恶性肿瘤患者的临床资料,其中观察组(47例,采用VPA治疗);对照组(58例,采用外周置入中心静脉导管治疗)。观察两组患者并发症发生情况,评估两种治疗方法的临床应用价值。结果:观察组患者导管留置时间长于对照组(P<0.05);观察组患者导管感染发生率和导管阻塞发生率均低于对照组(P<0.05);观察组患者临床价值的评估分数明显优于对照组(P<0.01)。结论:在恶性肿瘤患者化疗中,与外周置入中心静脉导管相比,VPA引起的并发症较少,临床应用较好,值得推广使用。Objective：To compare the clinical value between implantable venous port access （VPA）and peripherally inserted central catheter （ PICC ） in chemotherapy for malignant tumors. Methods： Between April 2009 and July 2011, the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed in 105 patients with malignant tumor registered in the Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangzhou Medical College. These patients were assigned to the study group with VPA treatment （n = 47 ） and the control group with PICC （n = 58 ）. The complication and the clinical value were evaluated and compared between two treatment methods. Results： （ 1 ） The catheter indwelling time in study group was longer than that in control group （ P 〈 0.05 ） ; （2） Both rates of infection and catheter obstruction in study group were lower than those in control group （ P 〈 0.05 ） ; （ 3 ） The clinical value of VPA scored significantly higher than that of PICC （P 〈 0.01 ）. Conclusion：Compared with PICC, VPA is associated with less complications and better clinical value, and is thus worthwhile for widespread use.

关 键 词：植入式静脉输液港 外周置入中心静脉导管 恶性肿瘤 化疗 

分 类 号：R473.73[医药卫生—护理学]