Manikandan Ramaswamy, Selvaratnam Veenesh, Philip Joe, Hanlon Ann, Machin Derek G, Williamson Michael
Department of Urology, Aintree University Hospitals, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
J Urol. 2009 Apr;181(4):1922-5. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.094. Epub 2009 Feb 23.
We evaluated the flow characteristics of various 3-way catheters.
We evaluated 14, 3-way catheters, including 18Fr, 20Fr, 22Fr and 24Fr Rusch(R), 18Fr, 20Fr, 22Fr and 24Fr Bardex(R), 18Fr, 20Fr, 22Fr and 24Fr Dover, and 20Fr and 22Fr Mentor (Mentor, Santa Barbara, California) catheters. Ten operators applied maximum 1-hand pressure with a 60 ml bladder wash syringe. Maximum and average flow rates were evaluated. The catheter was connected to an irrigation bottle and free flow irrigation speed was noted. The catheter was inserted into a latex balloon containing a prefilled volume of 100 ml and continuous irrigation characteristics were noted. Statistical analysis was performed using 1-way ANOVA and the Kruskal-Wallis test.
Rusch catheters had the best flow characteristics when the drainage port was used for manual irrigation with 18Fr catheters (Rusch and Dover 24.8 and 19.2 ml per second, p = 0.003, vs Bardex 17.67 ml per second, p <0.001), and with 20Fr Rusch, Bardex, Mentor and Dover catheters (27.7, 21.42, 27.1 and 24 ml per second, respectively, p = 0.034). In the other categories of catheters tested there was no significant difference among 22Fr Rusch, Bardex, Dover and Mentor catheters (29.4, 28.9, 25 and 28.27 ml per second, p = 0.32), and among 24Fr Rusch, Bardex and Dover catheters (32.2, 29.79 and 29.9 ml per second, respectively, p = 0.27). Upon using the irrigation channel for manual irrigation all catheters had similar flow characteristics (no statistically significant difference). When connected to the irrigation tube with free flow, although the 18Fr, 20Fr and 22Fr Rusch, and 24Fr Dover catheters had slightly better flow than the others, this was not statistically significant. There was no marked difference in flow rate as catheter size increased above 20Fr. When the artificial bladder was used, the Rusch catheters had the maximum drainage in the 18Fr and 20Fr sizes, whereas the Mentor and Dover catheters had the maximum drainage in the 22Fr and 24Fr sizes, respectively (no statistically significant difference).
The 18Fr and 20Fr Rusch 3-way catheters have better flow than other catheters when the drainage port is used for washout. In the 22Fr and 24Fr categories all different catheters had equivalent irrigation and drainage properties. Larger catheter size does not equate to better irrigation or drainage when continuous irrigation is used.
我们评估了各种三通导管的流量特性。
我们评估了14种三通导管，包括18Fr、20Fr、22Fr和24Fr的Rusch（R）导管、18Fr、20Fr、22Fr和24Fr的Bardex（R）导管、18Fr、20Fr、22Fr和24Fr的Dover导管，以及20Fr和22Fr的Mentor（加利福尼亚州圣巴巴拉市的Mentor公司）导管。10名操作人员使用60 ml膀胱冲洗注射器施加最大单手压力。评估了最大流速和平均流速。将导管连接到冲洗瓶并记录自由流动冲洗速度。将导管插入预先填充100 ml液体的乳胶球囊中并记录连续冲洗特性。使用单因素方差分析和Kruskal-Wallis检验进行统计分析。
当使用引流端口进行手动冲洗时，18Fr的Rusch导管具有最佳的流量特性（Rusch导管和Dover导管分别为每秒24.8 ml和19.2 ml，p = 0.003，相比之下Bardex导管为每秒17.67 ml，p <0.001），对于20Fr的Rusch导管、Bardex导管、Mentor导管和Dover导管也是如此（分别为每秒27.7 ml、21.42 ml、27.1 ml和24 ml，p = 0.034）。在测试的其他类别导管中，22Fr的Rusch导管、Bardex导管、Dover导管和Mentor导管之间没有显著差异（分别为每秒29.4 ml、28.9 ml、25 ml和28.27 ml，p = 0.32），24Fr的Rusch导管、Bardex导管和Dover导管之间也没有显著差异（分别为每秒32.2 ml、29.79 ml和29.9 ml，p = 0.27）。当使用冲洗通道进行手动冲洗时，所有导管具有相似的流量特性（无统计学显著差异）。当连接到自由流动的冲洗管时，尽管18Fr、20Fr和22Fr的Rusch导管以及24Fr的Dover导管的流量略优于其他导管，但这没有统计学显著性。当导管尺寸增加到20Fr以上时，流速没有明显差异。当使用人工膀胱时，18Fr和20Fr尺寸的Rusch导管具有最大引流，而22Fr和24Fr尺寸的Mentor导管和Dover导管分别具有最大引流（无统计学显著差异）。
当使用引流端口进行冲洗时，18Fr和20Fr的Rusch三通导管比其他导管具有更好的流量。在22Fr和24Fr类别中，所有不同导管具有等效的冲洗和引流特性。当使用连续冲洗时，较大的导管尺寸并不等同于更好的冲洗或引流效果。
Zotero 插件