Suppr超能文献

一项比较传统血液透析患者纽扣孔与绳梯针法的随机试验。

A randomized trial comparing buttonhole with rope ladder needling in conventional hemodialysis patients.

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

出版信息

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Oct;7(10):1632-8. doi: 10.2215/CJN.02730312. Epub 2012 Jul 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Buttonhole needling is reported to be associated with less pain than standard needling. The purpose of this study was to compare patient perceived pain and fistula complications in buttonhole and standard needling.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this study, 140 conventional hemodialysis patients were randomly assigned to buttonhole or standard needling. The primary outcome was patient perceived pain with needling at 8 weeks. Fistula complications of hematoma, bleeding postdialysis, and infection were tracked.

RESULTS

Median pain score at 8 weeks using a visual analog scale from 0 to 10 cm was similar for standard and buttonhole needling (1.2 [0.4-2.4] versus 1.5 [0.5-3.4]; P=0.57). Rate of hematoma formation in standard needling was higher (436 versus 295 of 1000 hemodialysis sessions; P=0.03). Rate of no bleeding postdialysis was 23.6 and 28.3 per 1000 in standard and buttonhole needling, respectively (P=0.40). Rate of localized signs of infection in standard versus buttonhole needling was 22.4 versus 50 per 1000 (P=0.003). There was one episode of Staphylococcal aureus bacteremia during the 8 weeks with buttonhole needling and no episodes with standard needling (P=1.00). Within 12 months of follow-up, another two buttonhole needling episodes developed S. aureus bacteremia, and nine buttonhole needling episodes had needling site abscesses requiring intravenous antibiotics versus zero standard needling episodes (P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients had no difference in pain between buttonhole and standard needling. Although fewer buttonhole needling patients developed a hematoma, there was an increased risk of bacteremia and localized signs of infection. Routine use of buttonhole needling is associated with increased infection risk.

摘要

背景与目的

有报道称,扣眼穿刺引起的疼痛小于标准穿刺。本研究旨在比较扣眼穿刺和标准穿刺时患者的疼痛感知和瘘管并发症。

设计、地点、参与者和测量方法:本研究中,140 名常规血液透析患者被随机分为扣眼穿刺或标准穿刺组。主要结局是 8 周时患者穿刺时的疼痛感知。跟踪血肿、透析后出血和感染等瘘管并发症。

结果

8 周时使用视觉模拟评分法(0 至 10cm)评估的疼痛中位数,标准穿刺和扣眼穿刺相似(1.2 [0.4-2.4]与 1.5 [0.5-3.4];P=0.57)。标准穿刺血肿发生率较高(436/1000 次血液透析与 295/1000 次;P=0.03)。标准穿刺和扣眼穿刺透析后无出血的发生率分别为 23.6 和 28.3/1000(P=0.40)。标准穿刺与扣眼穿刺局部感染体征的发生率分别为 22.4 和 50/1000(P=0.003)。在扣眼穿刺的 8 周内发生了 1 例金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症,而标准穿刺无此病例(P=1.00)。在 12 个月的随访期间,另外 2 例扣眼穿刺发生金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症,9 例扣眼穿刺出现穿刺部位脓肿,需要静脉使用抗生素,而标准穿刺无此病例(P=0.003)。

结论

患者在扣眼穿刺和标准穿刺之间的疼痛无差异。虽然扣眼穿刺患者血肿发生率较低,但发生菌血症和局部感染体征的风险增加。常规使用扣眼穿刺与感染风险增加相关。

相似文献

8
The buttonhole technique for fistula cannulation: pros and cons.扣眼穿刺技术在瘘管置管中的应用:利弊。
Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2013 Nov;22(6):629-36. doi: 10.1097/MNH.0b013e328365ae9e.

引用本文的文献

5
High-Grade Bacteremia in a Patient on Home Hemodialysis.接受家庭血液透析患者的重症菌血症
Fed Pract. 2023 Apr;40(4):123-127. doi: 10.12788/fp.0361. Epub 2023 Apr 18.
7
Buttonhole Cannulation of Arteriovenous Fistulas in the United States.美国动静脉瘘管的扣眼穿刺置管。
Kidney360. 2020 Mar 6;1(4):306-313. doi: 10.34067/KID.0000052020. eCollection 2020 Apr 30.
8
Should Buttonhole Cannulation of Arteriovenous Fistulas Be Used? CON.动静脉内瘘是否应采用纽扣式穿刺法?反对观点。
Kidney360. 2020 Apr 14;1(5):322-325. doi: 10.34067/KID.0000602019. eCollection 2020 May 28.
9
Should Buttonhole Cannulation of Arteriovenous Fistulas be Used? PRO.动静脉内瘘是否应采用钮扣孔穿刺法?支持观点。
Kidney360. 2020 Apr 14;1(5):318-321. doi: 10.34067/KID.0000702020. eCollection 2020 May 28.

本文引用的文献

9
Current management of vascular access.血管通路的当前管理。
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007 Jul;2(4):786-800. doi: 10.2215/CJN.00860207. Epub 2007 May 30.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验