自发性气胸患者分别经中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流与常规胸腔穿刺治疗的临床效果对比  

Clinical Effect Comparison of Closed Thoracic Drainage by CVC and Routine Thorancentesis for Treatment of Spontaneous Pneumothorax

作　　者：王维建[1] 

机构地区：[1]重庆市綦江区人民医院呼吸内科,重庆401420

出　　处：《中国医药导刊》2013年第8期1317-1318,共2页Chinese Journal of Medicinal Guide

摘　　要：目的:探究并分析中心静脉导管胸腔闭式引流与常规胸腔穿刺两种不同方法治疗自发性气胸的临床效果。方法:选取我院自2010年9月～2011年12月收治的自发气胸的典型患者60例,按照患者意愿分成A、B两组,每组30例患者。A组患者采用中心静脉导管胸腔闭式引流法治疗自发性气胸,即为试验组;B组患者采用常规胸腔穿刺法治疗自发性气胸,即为对照组。分别观察两组患者经不同治疗方式后的治疗情况、复发率以及并发症情况。结果:利用中心静脉导管胸腔闭式引流方法治疗此病与利用常规胸腔穿刺疗此病相比有效率高,引发血气胸、纵膈气肿的可能也明显降低,P<0.05,具有统计学意义。结论:中心静脉导管胸腔闭式引流对于治自发性气胸有更积极的影响,可减轻患者的痛苦,有效改善肺功能,值得临床推广。Objective： To discuss and analyze the clinical effect of closed thoracic drainage by CVC and routine thorancentesis for treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax.Methods： 60 spontaneous pneumothorax patients from September 2010 to December 2011 were divided according to the patients’ willings into A and B groups both with 30 cases.A group adopted closed thoracic drainage by CVC and B group adopted routine thorancentesis.Curative effect,recurrence rate and complications of both groups after treatment were observed.Results： A group had a higher effective rate than B group and it had a lower probability of occurrence of hemopneumothorax and pneumomediastinum,P0.05,the difference was statistically significant.Conclusion： Closed thoracic drainage by CVC has a better effect for treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax,it can relieve the patients＇ pain,improve lung function,and it is worth of being popularized in clinical work.

关 键 词：中心静脉 胸腔闭式引流 COPD 自发气胸 

分 类 号：R561[医药卫生—呼吸系统]