Shriver Amy, Rudnick Sean, Intagliata Nicolas, Wang Amanda, Caldwell Stephen H, Northup Patrick
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Ann Hepatol. 2017 March-April;16(2):279-284. doi: 10.5604/16652681.1231587.
The aim of this study is to investigate large volume therapeutic paracentesis using either a z-tract or axial (coxial) technique in a randomized controlled trial.
In this randomized, single blind study, patients with cirrhosis undergoing outpatient therapeutic paracentesis were randomized to the z-tract or the modified angular (coaxial) needle insertion technique. Subject and procedure characteristics were compared between the groups with ascites leakage as quantified by need for dressing changes with standardized sized gauze pads as a primary endpoint and subject procedural discomfort, operator preference, and procedure complications as secondary endpoints.
72 paracenteses were performed during the study period: 34 to the z-tract and 38 to the coaxial insertion technique. Following exclusions, a total of 61 paracenteses were analyzed: 30 using the z-tract technique and 31 using the coaxial technique. There were equal rates of post-procedural leakage of ascites between groups (13% in both groups, p = 1.00). Using the visual analog scale (0 - 100), there was a statistically significant increase in the subject reported pain score with the z-tract compared with the coaxial method [26.4 (95% CI 18.7 - 34.1) vs. 17.2 (95% CI 10.6 - 23.8), p = 0.04]. Mean physician rated procedure difficulty (1 - 5) was significantly higher for the z-tract versus the coaxial technique [2.1 (95% CI 1.6 - 2.6) vs. 1.5 (95% CI 1.2 - 1.8), p = 0.04].
When compared to the z-tract technique, the coaxial insertion technique is superior during large volume paracentesis in cirrhosis patients.
本研究的目的是在一项随机对照试验中,调查使用Z形路径或轴向(同轴)技术进行大量治疗性腹腔穿刺术的情况。
在这项随机、单盲研究中,将接受门诊治疗性腹腔穿刺术的肝硬化患者随机分为Z形路径组或改良角形(同轴)针穿刺技术组。比较两组的受试者和操作特征,以使用标准尺寸纱布垫更换敷料的需求来量化腹水渗漏情况作为主要终点,以受试者操作不适、操作者偏好和操作并发症作为次要终点。
在研究期间共进行了72次腹腔穿刺术:34次采用Z形路径技术,38次采用同轴穿刺技术。排除后,共分析了61次腹腔穿刺术:30次采用Z形路径技术,31次采用同轴技术。两组术后腹水渗漏率相同(均为13%,p = 1.00)。使用视觉模拟量表(0 - 100),与同轴方法相比,Z形路径技术组受试者报告的疼痛评分有统计学显著增加[26.4(95%CI 18.7 - 34.1)对17.2(95%CI 10.6 - 23.8),p = 0.04]。Z形路径技术的平均医生评定操作难度(1 - 5)显著高于同轴技术[2.1(95%CI 1.6 - 2.6)对1.5(95%CI 1.2 - 1.8),p = 0.04]。
与Z形路径技术相比,同轴穿刺技术在肝硬化患者大量腹腔穿刺术中更具优势。