临时性血液透析通路应用分析  

Security analysis of provisionally hemodialysis access

作　　者：崔转云 张燕[1] 毋建华[1] 吕丽萍[1] 

机构地区：[1]晋城煤业集团总医院,山西晋城048006

出　　处：《基层医学论坛》2014年第32期4331-4332,共2页The Medical Forum

摘　　要：目的分析经颈静脉与经股静脉建立临时性血液透析通路的安全性与稳定性。方法 87例未建立永久性血透通道透析患者先后共经股静脉建立血透通道47例,经颈内静脉40例。观察两种插管途径的导管留置时间、导管相关并发症等。结果经股静脉者均一次性成功建立通路,经颈静脉者有4例未能成功穿刺,改用经股静脉;颈内静脉组平均留置时间(114.1±17.5)d,明显优于股静脉组的(92.2±11.4)d,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);颈内静脉插管的感染及导管堵塞发生率低于股静脉插管。结论经颈静脉建立的临时通路并发症较少,但穿刺难度相对较大,对于穿刺经验不丰富的年轻医生推荐经股静脉建立血液透析通路。Objective To analysis of the security and stability of femoral vein catheterization（FVC） with that of internal jugular vein catheterization （IJVC） in hemodialysis. Methods 47 FVC and 40 IJVC were performed in 87 uremic patients for hemodialysis and the catheters survival life, complications were observed retrospectively. Results Hemodialysis access of FVC were established one-time successfully pathways. 4 cases of IJVC failed to puncture of jugular vein, switch to femoral vein. The survival life of IJVC was longer obviously than that of FVC （114.1±17.5days, 92.2 ±11.4days, P〈0.01） and a lower incidence of infection and inadequate blood flow were also discovered. Conclusions IJVC has fewer complications, but more Technical difficulties.FVC is relatively an ideal temporary blood aedeses of hemodialysis to young doctor or Experience is not rich.

关 键 词：血液透析 血管通路 颈内静脉 股静脉 

分 类 号：R459.5[医药卫生—治疗学]