Hakim M, Milstein B B
Ann Thorac Surg. 1986 Jan;41(1):85-8. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(10)64502-x.
Between January, 1974, and July, 1984, 63 cases of pleural empyema were treated at Papworth Hospital, Cambridge. Twenty-one of these patients had cyclical irrigation of the empyema cavity, and 23 patients underwent decortication. The two groups were comparable in age and sex distribution. There was no significant difference in the duration of empyema between the two groups (7 and 10.4 weeks for the patients having irrigation and decortication, respectively) (p greater than 0.05). There was no correlation between the duration of empyema and the length of hospital stay in either group (r = 0.007 and 0.005 for the irrigation and decortication groups, respectively). However, both the mean duration of tube drainage (7 and 13.5 days) and the length of hospital stay (12.3 and 17.3 days) were significantly shorter in the irrigation than in the decortication group (p less than 0.01). There were two failures in the decortication group and three in the irrigation group. Cyclical irrigation was also used in 4 patients with infected pneumonectomy space with satisfactory results. We conclude that cyclical irrigation is an effective, simple, and time-saving technique that does not preclude the use of other procedures if it fails.
1974年1月至1984年7月期间,剑桥帕普沃思医院共治疗了63例胸膜脓胸患者。其中21例患者接受了脓胸腔的周期性冲洗,23例患者接受了胸膜剥脱术。两组患者在年龄和性别分布上具有可比性。两组患者脓胸持续时间无显著差异(冲洗组和胸膜剥脱术组分别为7周和10.4周)(p>0.05)。两组中脓胸持续时间与住院时间均无相关性(冲洗组和胸膜剥脱术组的r值分别为0.007和0.005)。然而,冲洗组的平均引流管留置时间(7天和13.5天)和住院时间(12.3天和17.3天)均显著短于胸膜剥脱术组(p<0.01)。胸膜剥脱术组有2例治疗失败,冲洗组有3例。4例感染性肺切除腔隙患者也采用了周期性冲洗,效果满意。我们得出结论,周期性冲洗是一种有效、简单且节省时间的技术,如果失败并不排除使用其他手术方法。