Background Pleural effusion after the Fontan operation contributes significantly to morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether chest tubes placed in different ...Background Pleural effusion after the Fontan operation contributes significantly to morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether chest tubes placed in different cavities during the surgery would contribute to the drainage and also to evaluate risk factors of thoracic drainage with central venous catheter after total cavopulmonary connection in the era of the central venous catheter. Methods From January 2009 to June 2012, 109 consecutive patients underwent total cavopulmonary connection at Guangdong General Hospital. With 102 patients for investigation, preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative factors were obtained. Thoracic drainage with central venous catheter was whenever necessary. Duration of chest tube drainage and time of thoracic drainage with central venous catheter added up to total duration of pleural drainage. Binary logistic regression using forward LR method was applied for the analysis of the risk factors for thoracic drainage with central venous catheter. Results After total cavopulmonary connection, compared with chest tubes placed in single pleural cavity with or without pericardial or retrosternal cavity, those in both pleural cavities seemed to have the chance of longer hospital stay （P = 0.028）. No other significant differences were obtained in factors of ventilation time, extubated central venous pressure in superior vena cava, ICU stay, total duration of pleural drainage. Sildenafil was the preventive factor for reducing central venous pressure and preventing from postoperative pleural effusion. Conclusions After total cavopulmonary connection, patients with tubes placed in both pleural cavities would not have the chance of shorter total duration of pleural drainage and surprisingly turns out to have longer hospital stay. Sildenafil is a preventive factor for thoracic drainage with central venous catheter.展开更多
目的:对比中心静脉导管(CVC)胸腔闭式引流术(TCD)与胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗结核性胸膜炎(TBP)患者的效果。方法:回顾性选取2020年1月至2023年6月濮阳市第五人民医院60例TBP患者病例资料,按手术方案不同分为两组。以接受CVC-TCD治疗的30例患...目的:对比中心静脉导管(CVC)胸腔闭式引流术(TCD)与胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗结核性胸膜炎(TBP)患者的效果。方法:回顾性选取2020年1月至2023年6月濮阳市第五人民医院60例TBP患者病例资料,按手术方案不同分为两组。以接受CVC-TCD治疗的30例患者列为A组,以接受胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗的30例患者列为B组。对比两组手术效果、围术期指标、术前、术后14 d CD4^(+)/CD8^(+)炎性因子[干扰素-γ(IFN-γ)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)、γ-干扰素诱导蛋白10(IP-10)]、免疫功能(CD3^(+)、CD4^(+)、CD4^(+)/CD8^(+))水平、并发症发生率。结果:A组手术优良率96.67%(29/30)相较于B组73.33%(22/30)更高(P<0.05);A组胸液吸收时间、退热时间相较于B组更短,胸膜厚度、抽液总量相较于B组更低(P<0.05);A组术后14 d血清IFN-γ、TNF-α、IP-10水平相较于B组更低(P<0.05);A组术后14d CD3^(+)、CD4^(+)、CD4^(+)/CD8^(+)水平相较于B组更高(P<0.05);A组并发症发生率3.33%(1/30)相较于B组26.67%(8/30)更低(P<0.05)。结论:与胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗TBP患者相比,经CVC-TCD治疗可进一步提升手术效果,优化围术期指标,缓解机体炎性反应状态,提高免疫功能,降低并发症发生风险。展开更多
基金supported by the National Science and Technology Infrastructure Program of the twel fthfive-year-plan period(No.2011BAI11B22)
文摘Background Pleural effusion after the Fontan operation contributes significantly to morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether chest tubes placed in different cavities during the surgery would contribute to the drainage and also to evaluate risk factors of thoracic drainage with central venous catheter after total cavopulmonary connection in the era of the central venous catheter. Methods From January 2009 to June 2012, 109 consecutive patients underwent total cavopulmonary connection at Guangdong General Hospital. With 102 patients for investigation, preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative factors were obtained. Thoracic drainage with central venous catheter was whenever necessary. Duration of chest tube drainage and time of thoracic drainage with central venous catheter added up to total duration of pleural drainage. Binary logistic regression using forward LR method was applied for the analysis of the risk factors for thoracic drainage with central venous catheter. Results After total cavopulmonary connection, compared with chest tubes placed in single pleural cavity with or without pericardial or retrosternal cavity, those in both pleural cavities seemed to have the chance of longer hospital stay （P = 0.028）. No other significant differences were obtained in factors of ventilation time, extubated central venous pressure in superior vena cava, ICU stay, total duration of pleural drainage. Sildenafil was the preventive factor for reducing central venous pressure and preventing from postoperative pleural effusion. Conclusions After total cavopulmonary connection, patients with tubes placed in both pleural cavities would not have the chance of shorter total duration of pleural drainage and surprisingly turns out to have longer hospital stay. Sildenafil is a preventive factor for thoracic drainage with central venous catheter.
文摘目的:对比中心静脉导管(CVC)胸腔闭式引流术(TCD)与胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗结核性胸膜炎(TBP)患者的效果。方法:回顾性选取2020年1月至2023年6月濮阳市第五人民医院60例TBP患者病例资料,按手术方案不同分为两组。以接受CVC-TCD治疗的30例患者列为A组,以接受胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗的30例患者列为B组。对比两组手术效果、围术期指标、术前、术后14 d CD4^(+)/CD8^(+)炎性因子[干扰素-γ(IFN-γ)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)、γ-干扰素诱导蛋白10(IP-10)]、免疫功能(CD3^(+)、CD4^(+)、CD4^(+)/CD8^(+))水平、并发症发生率。结果:A组手术优良率96.67%(29/30)相较于B组73.33%(22/30)更高(P<0.05);A组胸液吸收时间、退热时间相较于B组更短,胸膜厚度、抽液总量相较于B组更低(P<0.05);A组术后14 d血清IFN-γ、TNF-α、IP-10水平相较于B组更低(P<0.05);A组术后14d CD3^(+)、CD4^(+)、CD4^(+)/CD8^(+)水平相较于B组更高(P<0.05);A组并发症发生率3.33%(1/30)相较于B组26.67%(8/30)更低(P<0.05)。结论:与胸腔穿刺抽液术治疗TBP患者相比,经CVC-TCD治疗可进一步提升手术效果,优化围术期指标,缓解机体炎性反应状态,提高免疫功能,降低并发症发生风险。
