Brandner P, Neis K J, Hettenbach A, Schmidt W
Universitäts-Frauenklinik und Poliklinik Homburg/Saar.
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1991 May;51(5):393-7. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1026165.
In a prospective, randomised study we compared the clinical properties of the established Redon drain with a new type of drain called "slit drain". Both types of drains were examined regarding the amount of drained fluid, the time elapsing until removal of the drain, the frequency of occlusion of the lumen as well as the patient's pain and the required force at extraction of the drain. The statistical analysis showed both drains to have equal abilities in draining of fluid if they were used under vacuum conditions. If used as nonsuction drains, the new device was able to drain more fluid than the established type of drain (p less than 0.05). Statistically relevant advantages of the slit drain were seen in a lower rate of obstruction of the lumen, a higher amount of drained fluid (as non-suction device) as well as an easier and less painful extraction.
在一项前瞻性随机研究中，我们比较了已确立的雷东引流管与一种新型引流管“缝隙引流管”的临床特性。对两种引流管都进行了检查，涉及引流液量、直至拔除引流管所经过的时间、管腔堵塞频率以及患者的疼痛情况和拔除引流管所需的力度。统计分析表明，如果在真空条件下使用，两种引流管在引流液体方面能力相当。如果作为非吸引引流管使用，新装置比已确立的引流管类型能够引流更多的液体（p小于0.05）。缝隙引流管在统计学上的相关优势表现为管腔堵塞率较低、引流液量较多（作为非吸引装置时）以及拔除更容易且疼痛较轻。
