Objective Totally implantable devices (TIDs) and external tunneled catheters (ETCs) became a basic requirement in the treatment of pediatric oncologic patients. Techniques for implantation and confirmation of proper ...Objective Totally implantable devices (TIDs) and external tunneled catheters (ETCs) became a basic requirement in the treatment of pediatric oncologic patients. Techniques for implantation and confirmation of proper position vary among different centers. The article presented different techniques for sonographic guided puncture of the target central vein and confirmation of the proper position of tunneled catheters.展开更多
目的通过meta分析比较国内外肿瘤化疗成人患者通过隧道式或非隧道式经外周置入中心静脉导管(PICC)后并发症的发生情况。方法检索中国知网、万方、维普、PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMbase、Web of Science和OVID Medline数据库中关于肿...目的通过meta分析比较国内外肿瘤化疗成人患者通过隧道式或非隧道式经外周置入中心静脉导管(PICC)后并发症的发生情况。方法检索中国知网、万方、维普、PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMbase、Web of Science和OVID Medline数据库中关于肿瘤化疗成人患者隧道式或非隧道式置入PICC并发症比较的随机对照研究或类实验性研究。结果最终共纳入12篇文献:随机对照研究8篇,类实验性研究4篇,隧道式置入PICC患者1486例,非隧道式置入PICC患者1592例。meta分析结果显示,与非隧道式置入PICC相比,一针式隧道式置入PICC的导管相关的血流感染的发生率较低[RR=0.30,95%CI(0.12,0.71),P<0.01];隧道式置入PICC的静脉血栓[RR=0.22,95%CI(0.08,0.59),P<0.001]、导管脱出、移位[RR=0.24,95%CI(0.15,0.39),P<0.001]以及穿刺点出血、渗血和血肿[RR=0.39,95%CI(0.29,0.52),P<0.001]的发生率较低。隧道式置入PICC的静脉炎[RR=0.70,95%CI(0.35,1.38),P=0.30]、导管堵塞[RR=0.89,95%CI(0.55,1.45),P=0.64]和神经损伤[RR=0.61,95%CI(0.14,2.55),P=0.49]的发生率未见明显降低。结论肿瘤化疗患者隧道式置入PICC在降低CABSI、静脉血栓、导管脱出、移位以及穿刺点出血、渗血和血肿等方面均具有明显优势,但降低CABSI的效果主要体现在一针式隧道式置入PICC中。展开更多
文摘Objective Totally implantable devices (TIDs) and external tunneled catheters (ETCs) became a basic requirement in the treatment of pediatric oncologic patients. Techniques for implantation and confirmation of proper position vary among different centers. The article presented different techniques for sonographic guided puncture of the target central vein and confirmation of the proper position of tunneled catheters.
文摘目的通过meta分析比较国内外肿瘤化疗成人患者通过隧道式或非隧道式经外周置入中心静脉导管(PICC)后并发症的发生情况。方法检索中国知网、万方、维普、PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMbase、Web of Science和OVID Medline数据库中关于肿瘤化疗成人患者隧道式或非隧道式置入PICC并发症比较的随机对照研究或类实验性研究。结果最终共纳入12篇文献:随机对照研究8篇,类实验性研究4篇,隧道式置入PICC患者1486例,非隧道式置入PICC患者1592例。meta分析结果显示,与非隧道式置入PICC相比,一针式隧道式置入PICC的导管相关的血流感染的发生率较低[RR=0.30,95%CI(0.12,0.71),P<0.01];隧道式置入PICC的静脉血栓[RR=0.22,95%CI(0.08,0.59),P<0.001]、导管脱出、移位[RR=0.24,95%CI(0.15,0.39),P<0.001]以及穿刺点出血、渗血和血肿[RR=0.39,95%CI(0.29,0.52),P<0.001]的发生率较低。隧道式置入PICC的静脉炎[RR=0.70,95%CI(0.35,1.38),P=0.30]、导管堵塞[RR=0.89,95%CI(0.55,1.45),P=0.64]和神经损伤[RR=0.61,95%CI(0.14,2.55),P=0.49]的发生率未见明显降低。结论肿瘤化疗患者隧道式置入PICC在降低CABSI、静脉血栓、导管脱出、移位以及穿刺点出血、渗血和血肿等方面均具有明显优势,但降低CABSI的效果主要体现在一针式隧道式置入PICC中。