D'Angelo Francesco A, Ramacciato Giovanni, Aurello Paolo, De Angelis Renato, Amodio Pietro, Magrì Matilde, Barillari Paolo
Dipartimento di Chirurgia P. Valdoni II Facoltà di Medicina e Chirurgia Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza.
Chir Ital. 2002 Jul-Aug;54(4):495-500.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the results of a prospective randomised trial comparing cephalic vein cut-down (CCD) versus percutaneous subclavian vein puncture with the Seldinger technique (PSP) in the implantation of subcutaneous permanent central venous access devices (SPCVAD) in order to better define the safer technique in outpatient surgery. Fifty patients were randomly divided into two groups: CCD--17 males, 8 females (age range: 35-75 years; mean: 60 years); PSP--17 males, 8 females (age range: 17-75 years; mean: 63 years). The two groups were compared in terms of implant morbidity, technical failure, operative time, patient acceptance, and healthcare costs. Data were analysed statistically using the chi-square test (P < 0.05 was considered significant) and Student's t-test. Technical failure occurred in 2 PSP patients (8%) and in 4 CCD patients (16%) (P = 0.663; chi 2 = 0.189). Mean operative time was 40 min in PSP (range: 35-70 min) and 50 in CCD (range: 35-60 min) (p = 0.108, T = -1.64). Patients were requested to define the pain experiences as a result of the operation as mild, moderate or severe: 23 PSP patients reported mild to moderate pain (92% of cases), and 2 patients severe pain (8%). The same figures were obtained in the CCD group, i.e. 23 (92%) and 2 (8%) patients, respectively (P = 0.377; chi 2 = 0.781). In our institute both types of implant cost $1260; in the case of PSP there is an additional cost of $120 for postoperative chest x-rays, making a total cost of $1380 per implant. The data of this randomised trial show that the implantation of a totally implantable vascular access device is a surgical procedure with a limited rate of morbidity in both cephalic vein cut-down and subclavian vein percutaneous puncture, with no statistically significant difference between the two in terms of associated morbidity, technical failure, operative time and patient acceptance.
本研究的目的是评估一项前瞻性随机试验的结果,该试验比较了头静脉切开术(CCD)与经皮锁骨下静脉穿刺Seldinger技术(PSP)在皮下永久性中心静脉通路装置(SPCVAD)植入中的应用,以便更好地确定门诊手术中更安全的技术。50例患者被随机分为两组:CCD组——男性17例,女性8例(年龄范围:35 - 75岁;平均:60岁);PSP组——男性17例,女性8例(年龄范围:17 - 75岁;平均:63岁)。比较两组在植入并发症、技术失败、手术时间、患者接受度和医疗费用方面的情况。使用卡方检验(P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义)和学生t检验对数据进行统计学分析。PSP组有2例患者(8%)发生技术失败,CCD组有4例患者(16%)发生技术失败(P = 0.663;χ² = 0.189)。PSP组的平均手术时间为40分钟(范围:35 - 70分钟),CCD组为50分钟(范围:35 - 60分钟)(p = 0.108,T = -1.64)。要求患者将手术引起的疼痛体验定义为轻度、中度或重度:23例PSP组患者报告轻度至中度疼痛(92%的病例),2例患者报告重度疼痛(8%)。CCD组也得到了相同的数据,即分别有23例(92%)和2例(8%)患者(P = 0.377;χ² = 0.781)。在我们研究所,两种植入方式的费用均为1260美元;对于PSP,术后胸部X光检查还有额外120美元的费用,使得每个植入物的总成本为1380美元。这项随机试验的数据表明,植入完全可植入式血管通路装置是一种手术操作,头静脉切开术和锁骨下静脉经皮穿刺的并发症发生率都有限,在相关并发症、技术失败、手术时间和患者接受度方面两者之间无统计学显著差异。