Suppr超能文献

A prospective, randomized comparison between open and closed peritoneal lavage techniques.

作者信息

Cué J I, Miller F B, Cryer H M, Malangoni M A, Richardson J D

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, KY 40202.

出版信息

J Trauma. 1990 Jul;30(7):880-3. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199007000-00019.

Abstract

We randomized 327 blunt trauma patients to compare the open peritoneal lavage technique with the percutaneous (Seldinger wire) technique. The open and closed lavage groups were similar with respect to accuracy and safety. There were one complication in the percutaneous group and two in patients treated by the open method. The incidence of positive lavage was similar in each group. There was one false positive in the percutaneous group and none in the open method group. False negative results did not occur by either method. The percutaneous lavage method required less time for performance, had better patient tolerance, and only required one surgeon to perform the procedure. Percutaneous diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL), in the hands of trauma surgeons, is a safe and acceptable alternative to the open DPL method and actually had several advantages as mentioned above.

摘要

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验