[1]张骁燕.植入式输液港与PICC置管应用于乳腺癌术后化疗的优势[J].医学信息,2019,32(21):184.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.21.063]
　ZHANG Xiao-yan.Implantable Infusion Port and PICC Catheter for the Advantages of Postoperative Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer[J].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(21):184.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.21.063]
点击复制

植入式输液港与PICC置管应用于乳腺癌术后化疗的优势()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
32卷
期数:
2019年21期
页码:
184
栏目:
护理研究
出版日期:
2019-11-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Implantable Infusion Port and PICC Catheter for the Advantages of Postoperative Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer
文章编号:
1006-1959（2019）21-0184-02
作者:
张骁燕
（汕头大学医学院第二附属医院肝胆胰脾外科，广东 汕头 515000）
Author(s):
ZHANG Xiao-yan
(Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Spleen,the Second Affiliated Hospital,Shantou University Medical College,Shantou 515000,Guangdong,China)
关键词:
植入式输液港; PICC管; 乳腺癌; 化疗
Keywords:
Implanted infusion port; PICC tube; Breast cancer; Chemotherapy
分类号:
R473.73
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.21.063
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 分析植入式静脉输液港（VPA）与经外周置入中心静脉导管（PICC）应用于乳腺癌术后化疗的优势。方法 选择2017年6月~2019年6月在我院化疗的乳腺癌患者120例，采用随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组，各60例。对照组采用PICC置管，观察组采用VPA置管，比较两组患者一次性置管率、导管留置时间、管路维护时间、非计划性拔管率、置管期间并发症发生率以及日常生活能力。结果 观察组一次性置管率为98.33%、非计划性拔管率为3.33%分别与对照组的96.67%、6.67%比较，差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；观察组导管留置时间为（4.65±1.22）个月，长于对照组的（2.42±0.87）个月，管路维护时间为（11.12±2.16）min，短于对照组的（15.52±2.35）min（P＜0.05）；观察组置管期间并发症发生率为5.00%，低于对照组的18.33%（P＜0.05）；观察组日常生活能力评分高于对照组（P＜0.05）。结论 VPA置管优势大于PICC置管，并发症发生率低，置管时间长，具有良好的临床应用效果。
Abstract:
Objective To analyze the advantages of implantable intravenous port (VPA) and peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) for postoperative chemotherapy in breast cancer. Methods A total of 120 breast cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy in our hospital from June 2017 to June 2019 were randomly divided into the control group and the observation group, 60 cases each. The control group was treated with PICC, and the observation group was treated with VPA. The one-time catheterization rate, catheter indwelling time, pipeline maintenance time, unplanned extubation rate, incidence of complications during catheterization, and daily life were compared between the two groups. ability. Results The one-time catheterization rate was 98.33% in the observation group, and the unplanned extubation rate was 3.33% compared with 96.67% and 6.67% in the control group,the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The catheter indwelling time in the observation group was (4.65±1.22) months, longer than the control group (2.42±0.87) months, the pipeline maintenance time was (11.12±2.16) min, which was lower than that of the control group (15.52±2.35) min(P<0.05); the incidence of complications during the catheterization was 5.00%, which was lower than that of the control group 18.33%(P<0.05). The daily living ability score of the observation group was higher than that of the control group(P<0.05). Conclusion The advantages of VPA catheterization are greater than PICC catheterization, the incidence of complications is low, and the catheterization time is long, which has a good clinical application effect.

参考文献/References:

[1]黄翠红,陈秀梅,黄翠娟,等.植入式静脉输液港与经外周中心静脉置管在化疗患者中的应用效果比较[J].广东医学,2016, 37(3):472-473. [2]赵许亚,黄宇,汪玲.植入式中心静脉输液港与经外周静脉中心静脉置管在恶性肿瘤患者中应用的对比观察[J].中国实用医药,2014,9(34):217-218. [3]张晓玲,许英娜,汪丹,等.植入式静脉输液港与外周静脉穿刺中心静脉置管在肿瘤化疗中的临床应用[J].中国医药导报,2015,12(17):136-139. [4]王虹,刘晓娟,冷育清,等.年轻乳腺癌化疗患者应用植入式静脉输液港的临床观察及护理对策[J].海南医学,2015,26(21):3274-3276. [5]陈素香,梁芳,黄雪珠.植入式静脉输液港与经外周静脉穿刺中心静脉置管在高龄患者的应用[J].中国全科医学,2014,17(3):331-333.

更新日期/Last Update: 2019-11-01