Suppr超能文献

连续术后心包冲洗法与成人心脏手术后伤口引流的标准护理比较:一项随机对照试验。

Continuous postoperative pericardial flushing method versus standard care for wound drainage after adult cardiac surgery: A randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location AMC, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Clinical Research Unit, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

EBioMedicine. 2020 May;55:102744. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102744. Epub 2020 Apr 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Excessive bleeding, incomplete wound drainage, and subsequent accumulation of blood and clots in the pericardium have been associated with a broad spectrum of bleeding-related complications after cardiac surgery. We developed and studied the continuous postoperative pericardial flushing (CPPF) method to improve wound drainage and reduce blood loss and bleeding-related complications.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, open-label, ITT, randomized controlled trial at the Academic Medical Center Amstserdam. Adults undergoing cardiac surgery for non-emergent valvular or congenital heart disease (CHD) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive CPPF method or standard care. The primary outcome was actual blood loss after 12-hour stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). Secondary outcomes included bleeding-related complications and clinical outcome after six months follow-up.

FINDINGS

Between May 2013 and February 2016, 170 patients were randomly allocated to CPPF method (study group; n = 80) or to standard care (control group; n = 90). CPPF significantly reduced blood loss after 12-hour stay in the ICU (-41%) when compared to standard care (median differences -155 ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) -310 to 0; p=≤0·001). Cardiac tamponade and reoperation for bleeding did not occur in the study group versus one and three in the control group, respectively. At discharge from hospital, patients in the study group were less likely to have pleural effusion in a surgically opened pleural cavity (22% vs. 36%; p = 0·043).

INTERPRETATION

Our study results indicate that CPPF is a safe and effective method to improve chest tube patency and reduce blood loss after cardiac surgery. Larger trials are needed to draw final conclusions concerning the effectiveness of CPPF on clinically relevant outcomes.

摘要

背景

心脏手术后,心包内过度出血、伤口引流不充分以及随后血液和凝块的积聚与广泛的出血相关并发症有关。我们开发并研究了连续术后心包冲洗(CPPF)方法,以改善伤口引流并减少失血量和出血相关并发症。

方法

我们在阿姆斯特丹学术医学中心进行了一项单中心、开放标签、ITT、随机对照试验。接受非紧急瓣膜或先天性心脏病(CHD)心脏手术的成年人按 1:1 随机分配接受 CPPF 方法或标准护理。主要结局是在重症监护病房(ICU)停留 12 小时后的实际失血量。次要结局包括出血相关并发症和 6 个月随访后的临床结局。

发现

2013 年 5 月至 2016 年 2 月,170 名患者被随机分配至 CPPF 方法(研究组;n=80)或标准护理(对照组;n=90)。与标准护理相比,CPPF 显著减少了 ICU 停留 12 小时后的失血量(减少 41%)(中位数差值-155ml,95%置信区间(CI)-310 至 0;p=≤0·001)。研究组未发生心脏压塞和因出血再次手术,而对照组分别有 1 例和 3 例。出院时,研究组开胸手术胸腔内发生胸腔积液的患者较少(22% vs. 36%;p=0·043)。

解释

我们的研究结果表明,CPPF 是一种安全有效的方法,可改善胸部引流管通畅性并减少心脏手术后的失血量。需要更大规模的试验来得出 CPPF 对临床相关结局有效性的最终结论。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5afe/7186490/d0628dc5c965/gr1.jpg

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