ObjectiveTo compare and evaluate the application of two types of chest drainage in patients who had undergone the lung lobe resection. MethodWe retrospective analyzed the clinical data of 240 patients who underwent left lobe resection. The patients were divided into a single conventional drainage group with single chest drainage tube (normal group) and a single conventional drainage tube combined with drainage of disposable surgical negative pressure drainage ball (NPBD) (combination group). There were 140 patients including 86 males and 54 females at mean age of 48.76± 4.92 years in the normal group. There were 100 patients including 58 males and 42 females at mean age of 48.37± 4.56 years in the combination group. We compared the outcomes between the two groups. ResultThe postoperative pathological results revealed there were 12 patients with tuberculosis (TB), 87 patients with squamous carcinoma, and 41 patients with adenocarcinoma in the normal group; 5 patients with TB, 66 patients with squamous carcinoma, and 29 patients with adenocarcinoma in the combination group. There were statistical differences in postoperative hospital stay (11.35± 2.78 d vs. 9.33± 2.46 d), chest drainage tube indwelling time (6.75± 2.10 d vs. 8.28± 2.10 d), total volume of chest drainage (1 176.07± 384.62 ml vs. 926.50± 22.35 ml) with P values less than 0.001 between the normal group and the combination group. No statistical difference was found between the two groups in complications (P>0.05). ConclusionSingle conventional drainage tube combined with drainage of disposable surgical negative pressure drainage ball (NPBD) has more advantages than single conventional chest drainage tube drainage, and is worth to be applied popularly in clinic.
目的 探討胰十二指腸切除術中引流管的放置與術后管理的方法。方法回顧性分析88例胰十二指腸切除術后管理經驗。結果 術后腹腔并發癥的發生率為10.2%(9/88)，胃排空障礙發生率為3.4(3/88)%，其中保留幽門胰十二指腸切除術后胃排空障礙發生率為5.5%(3/55)。結論 胰十二指腸切除術后腹腔引流是預防術后并發癥的重要方法，術中合理放置引流管，術后加強腹腔引流的管理，能減少術后并發癥的發生。
ObjectiveTo assess the safety for removing nasogastric tube(NGT)within postoperative 24 h in Whipple pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD)patients. MethodsThe clinical data of 310 patients performed classic Whipple PD from January 2008 to March 2013 in this hospital were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into early (≤24 h after operation)removing NGT group and late( > 24 h after operation)removing NGT group according to the time of NGT duration. The ratio of NGT reinsertion, time of solid diet tolerance, hospital stay, mortality, and major complications associated with PD were compared between two groups. Results①The demography and preoperative comorbidities characteristics were similar(P > 0.05).②There was no statistical difference of ratio of NGT reinsertion between two groups(P=0.450).③The differences of rates of major complications associated with PD and mortality were not statistically different(P > 0.05)by univariate analysis, but the rate of total complications in the early removing NGT group was significantly lower than that in the late removing NGT group (P=0.014)by multivariate analysis.④The average time of solid diet tolerance(P=0.013)and average hospital stay(P < 0.001)in the early removing NGT group were significantly shorter than those in the late removing NGT group. ConclusionFor patients comfort, NGT following PD should be removed as early as possible even immediately after extubation for selective patients.
目的 介紹胸部良性疾病經單孔胸腔鏡切除術后免胸腔引流管的臨床經驗。 方法 回顧性分析 2015 年 10 月至 2016 年 10 月我院胸外科 17 例行單孔胸腔鏡手術患者的臨床資料，其中男 9 例、女 8 例，年齡 33.8（17～58）歲。行肺大皰切除術 7 例，肺楔形切除術 9 例，交感神經烙斷術 1 例。 結果 所有患者均經單孔胸腔鏡手術有效切除，期間無中轉開胸或再次開操作孔，術后不放置胸腔引流管，手術時間為（60.3±8.2）min，術中出血量為（15.2±5.1）ml，術后第 1 d、2 d、3 d 疼痛視覺模擬評分（VAS） 為 6.5±2.2，5.8±2.1，3.5±1.3，術后舒適度評分分別為 8.6±1.3，術后早期下床活動時間為（1.0±0.3）d，切口甲級愈合率 100.0%。17 例患者均無心律失常、肺部感染等并發癥，術后隨訪 6 個月氣胸均無復發。 結論 合理選擇及嚴格基線評估，胸部良性疾病經單孔胸腔鏡切除術后免胸腔引流管是安全可行的，可能有利于患者術后快速康復。
Objective To explore the effect of 16F gastric tube on pain relief in postoperative lung cancer patients. Methods A total of 118 lung cancer patients were treated with radical resection of lung cancer in our hospital between January 2015 and May 2016. The patients were assigned into two groups: a 16F gastric tube group (16F group, 60 patients, 30 males and 30 females at age of 41-73 (52.13±7.83) years and a 28F drainage tube group (28F group, 58 patients, 25 males and 33 females at age of 45-75 (55.62±4.27) years. Clinical effects were compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistical difference in drainage time (4.47±1.03 dvs. 4.24±1.16 d, P=0.473), drainage amount (560.37±125.00 mlvs. 656.03±132.45 ml, P=0.478), incidences of pneumothorax (5/60 vs. 2/58, P=0.439), pleural effusion (6/60 vs. 3/58, P=0.522), and subcutaneous emphysema (3/60 vs. 1/58, P=0.635) between the two groups (P>0.05). The pain caused by the drainage tube in the16F group was less than that in the 28F drainage tube group with a statistical difference (F=4 242.996, P<0.001). The frequency of taking analgesics in the 16F group was significantly less than that in the 28F group (12/60vs. 26/58, P<0.001). Conclusion The effects of draining pleural effusions and promoting lung recruitment are similar between the 16F group and the 28F group. However, the wound pain caused by 16F gastric tube is significantly less than that by 28F drainage tube.
ObjectiveTo compare and evaluate the effect and quality of T-tube drainage and bulit-in-tube drainage plus primary suture after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). MethodsA clinical trial was taken in 79 cases with T-tube drainage (control group) and 62 cases with built-in-tube drainage (observation group). The treatment success rate, incidence of complications, bilirubin recovered time, length of stay, recuperation time, and treatment cost were measured and compared between the two groups. ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in treatment success rate, incidences of complications, and bilirubin recovered time of patients （Pgt;0.05）, while length of stay, recuperation time, and treatment cost of patients in observation group were significantly less than those in control group （Plt;0.05）. ConclusionsBuilt-in-tube drainage plus primary suture after LC and common bile duct exploration could achieve the same therapeutic effect as the traditional T-tube drainage with less length of stay, recuperation time, and treatment cost.
ObjectiveTo assess the safety of the removal of pericardial and mediastinal drain within different drainage volume after cardiac valvular replacement surgery.MethodsBetween July 2013 and July 2017, 201 patients with rheumatic heart disease (CHD) were treated with valve replacement in our hospital, including 57 males and 144 females, aged 15 to 72 years. They were divided into two groups according to the amount of 24-h drainage before the drain removal: a group one with 24-h drainage volume≤50 ml (n=127) and a group two with 24-h drainage volume>50 ml (n=74). The postoperative hospital stay and the incidence of severe complications between the two groups were compared.ResultsThere was no difference between the two groups in the baseline information or the incidence of severe pericardial effusion and tamponade, while the group two tended to have a shorter length of hospital stay after surgery (8.0 d vs. 7.5 d, P=0.013).ConclusionIn CHD patients undergoing valvular surgery, compared with a relatively low amount of drainage before the drain removal, drawing the tube at a greater amount of drainage (24-h drainage volume>50 ml) will shorten the length of hospital stay after cardiac surgery while incidence of severe complications remains the same.