Suppr超能文献

经皮引导钢丝更换中心静脉导管在肠衰竭患者中的应用:单中心研究。

Usefulness of central venous catheter replacement with a guidewire in patients with intestinal failure: a single-center study.

机构信息

Department of Pediatric Surgery, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan.

出版信息

Pediatr Surg Int. 2024 Aug 15;40(1):226. doi: 10.1007/s00383-024-05806-w.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Patients with intestinal failure (IF) require long-term parenteral nutrition using central venous catheters (CVCs), which often require replacement. We adopted a less fallible guidewire replacement (GWR) method and verified its effectiveness and validity.

METHODS

We enrolled 108 cases that underwent a CVC replacement with "GWR" method with IF at our department between 2013 and 2023. We retrospectively reviewed patients' clinical details with tunneled CVC (Hickman/Broviac catheter). For the analysis, we compared for the same time period the catheter exchange method "Primary placement"; newly inserted catheter by venipuncture.

RESULTS

The success rate of catheter replacement using GWR was 94.4%. There were six unsuccessful cases. A log-rank test showed no significant difference in catheter survival between primary placement and the GWR, and the time to first infection was significantly longer in the GWR (p = 0.001). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the two methods until the first infection, when the exchange indication was limited to infections. In the same way, when the indication was restricted to catheter-related bloodstream infection, there was no significant difference in catheter survival between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION

Our GWR procedure was easy to perform and stable, with a high success rate and almost no complications. Moreover, using a guidewire did not increase the frequency of catheter replacement and the infection rate.

摘要

目的

患有肠衰竭(IF)的患者需要长期使用中心静脉导管(CVC)进行肠外营养,而这些导管常常需要更换。我们采用了一种可靠性更高的导丝更换(GWR)方法,并验证了其有效性和实用性。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 2013 年至 2023 年间在我院因 IF 接受 CVC 更换的 108 例患者的临床资料。这些患者均采用“GWR”方法更换隧道式 CVC(Hickman/Broviac 导管)。在分析中,我们比较了同期采用经皮穿刺新插入导管的“初次置管”作为对照。

结果

GWR 组导管更换成功率为 94.4%。有 6 例失败。对数秩检验显示,初次置管和 GWR 组的导管生存率无显著差异,GWR 组的首次感染时间显著延长(p=0.001)。此外,在首次感染之前,两种方法之间没有观察到显著差异,此时交换指征仅限于感染。同样,当指征仅限于导管相关血流感染时,两种方法的导管生存率也没有显著差异。

结论

我们的 GWR 操作简单、稳定,成功率高,几乎没有并发症。此外,使用导丝不会增加导管更换的频率和感染率。

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