两种不同引流术对肺癌合并胸腔积液患者的疗效对比研究

Comparative Study on the Curative Effect of Two Different Drainage Methods on Patients with Lung Cancer and Pleural Effusion

目的比较研究胸腔置管闭式引流与穿刺置管引流术对肺癌合并胸腔积液患者的疗效。方法选取2016年7月—2018年6月湖北省孝感市中心医院收治的肺癌合并胸腔积液患者120例,随机分为对照组(n=60,行胸腔穿刺引流术)和观察组(n=60,行胸腔置管闭式引流);观察比较两组胸腔积液疗效、生活质量变化及并发症情况。结果观察组总有效率为86.67%,明显高于对照组的65.00%(P<0.05)。与对照组比较,观察组总引流量明显较大(P<0.05),积液吸收时间及住院时间明显缩短(P<0.05)。治疗后,观察组生活质量明显优于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组胸膜反应、气胸及总并发症发生率分别为1.67%、5.00%、13.33%,均明显低于对照组的11.67%、16.67%、48.33%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论胸腔置管闭式引流治疗肺癌合并胸腔积液,可提高治疗有效率,改善生活质量,减少并发症,是较胸腔穿刺引流术更安全有效的引流术式。

Objective To comparatively study the curative effect of chest catheterization closed drainage and puncture catheterization drainage on patients with lung cancer and pleural effusion.Methods A total of 120 patients with lung cancer and pleural effusion admitted to the hospital from July 2016 to June 2018 were randomly divided into control group(n=60,chest puncture drainage)and observation group(n=60,chest catheterization closed drainage).The curative effect of pleural effusion,changes in quality of life and complications were observed and compared between the two groups.Results The total response rate of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group(86.67%VS 65.00%)(P<0.05).Compared with that of the control group,the total drainage volume of the observation group was significantly larger(P<0.05),while the effusion absorption time and hospitalization time were significantly shorter(P<0.05).After treatment,the quality of life of the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group(P<0.05).The incidence rates of pleural reaction,pneumothorax and total complication in the observation group were 1.67%,5.00%and 13.33%,respectively,which were significantly lower than those(11.67%,16.67%and 48.33%)of the control group(P<0.05).Conclusion Chest catheterization closed drainage for the treatment of lung cancer with pleural effusion can improve the response rate of treatment,improve the quality of life,and reduce complications.It is a safer and more effective drainage method compared with chest puncture drainage.