植入式静脉输液港在血液病化疗患者中的应用研究(1)
[摘要] 目的 針对血液病化疗患者应用经上臂静脉植入式输液港及经颈内静脉胸壁式输液港的临床应用效果进行分析研究。方法 方便选取该院2018年8月—2019年8月收治的118例需应用输液港的白血病、淋巴瘤、多发性骨髓瘤等患者作为研究对象，并通过输液港植入方式的不同将患者分为上臂式静脉输液港组共40例以及胸壁式静脉输液港组78例。并通过统计对比两组患者植入导管长度以及术后并发症，舒适度等指标进行临床效果的应用研究。结果 上臂式静脉输液港组血管内植入导管长度为(36.15±3.16)cm，胸壁式静脉输液港组血管内植入导管长度为(14.26±2.19)cm，组间数据差异有统计学意义(t=44.011，P=0.000)。两组患者并发症概率分别为17.50%及20.51%，组间数据差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.153，P=0.696)。上臂式静脉输液港组患者术后1 d舒适度评分为(0.77±0.56)分、胸壁式静脉输液港患者术后1 d舒适度评分为( 2.17±0.47)分，组间数据差异有统计学意义(t=8.728，P=0.000)。结论 针对血液病化疗患者应用经上臂静脉植入式输液港及经颈内静脉胸壁式输液港均为安全性较高的治疗方式，但上臂静脉植入式输液港对患者而言痛苦程度较小，具有实际应用的价值。
[关键词] 完全植入式静脉输液港; 上臂式; 胸壁式; 临床应用;血液病
[中图分类号] R473 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742(2020)01(b)-0134-03
Application of Implantable Intravenous Infusion Port in Patients with Hematological Chemotherapy
ZU Liang-yan
Department of Hematology， the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University， Hefei， Anhui Province， 230000 China
[Abstract] Objective To analyze the clinical application effect of the upper arm vein implanted infusion port and the internal vein chest wall infusion port for patients with hematologic chemotherapy. Methods Convenient elect a total of 118 patients with leukemia， lymphoma and multiple myeloma who were admitted to the infusion port were enrolled in the hospital from August 2018 to August 2019. The patients were divided into different types of implants in the infusion port. There were 40 cases in the upper arm infusion group and 78 cases in the chest wall infusion port group. The clinical effects of the two groups of patients implanted catheter to length and postoperative complications， comfort and other indicators were statistically compared. Results The intravascular implant catheter length in the upper arm venous port group was (36.15±3.16) cm， and the length of intravascular implant catheter in the chest wall venous port group was (14.26±2.19) cm. The difference between the groups was statistically significant (t=44.011， P=0.00). The complication probability of the two groups was 17.50% and 20.51%， respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups(χ2=0.153， P=0.696). In the upper arm vein infusion group， the first day postoperative comfort score was (0.77±0.56) points， and the chest wall vein infusion port patients had the first day postoperative comfort score of (2.17±0.47) points， and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (t=8.728， P=0.000). Conclusion The application of the upper arm vein implanted infusion port and the internal vein chest wall infusion port for patients with hematologic chemotherapy are safer， but the upper arm vein implantable port is less painful for the patient， with the value of practical application., http://www.100md.com(祖良彦)
[关键词] 完全植入式静脉输液港; 上臂式; 胸壁式; 临床应用;血液病
[中图分类号] R473 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742(2020)01(b)-0134-03
Application of Implantable Intravenous Infusion Port in Patients with Hematological Chemotherapy
ZU Liang-yan
Department of Hematology， the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University， Hefei， Anhui Province， 230000 China
[Abstract] Objective To analyze the clinical application effect of the upper arm vein implanted infusion port and the internal vein chest wall infusion port for patients with hematologic chemotherapy. Methods Convenient elect a total of 118 patients with leukemia， lymphoma and multiple myeloma who were admitted to the infusion port were enrolled in the hospital from August 2018 to August 2019. The patients were divided into different types of implants in the infusion port. There were 40 cases in the upper arm infusion group and 78 cases in the chest wall infusion port group. The clinical effects of the two groups of patients implanted catheter to length and postoperative complications， comfort and other indicators were statistically compared. Results The intravascular implant catheter length in the upper arm venous port group was (36.15±3.16) cm， and the length of intravascular implant catheter in the chest wall venous port group was (14.26±2.19) cm. The difference between the groups was statistically significant (t=44.011， P=0.00). The complication probability of the two groups was 17.50% and 20.51%， respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups(χ2=0.153， P=0.696). In the upper arm vein infusion group， the first day postoperative comfort score was (0.77±0.56) points， and the chest wall vein infusion port patients had the first day postoperative comfort score of (2.17±0.47) points， and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (t=8.728， P=0.000). Conclusion The application of the upper arm vein implanted infusion port and the internal vein chest wall infusion port for patients with hematologic chemotherapy are safer， but the upper arm vein implantable port is less painful for the patient， with the value of practical application., http://www.100md.com(祖良彦)