中国组织工程研究

中国组织工程研究 ›› 2012, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (35): 6494-6497.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2012.35.007

• 人工假体 artificial prosthesis • 上一篇    下一篇

初次髋关节置换后不放置引流管的安全性

陈 科1，吕小华2，曾 荣1，郭伟韬1，谭宏昌1   

  1. 1广东医学院附属医院骨科，广东省湛江市 524001；
    2广东医学院药理学教研室，广东省湛江市 524023
  • 收稿日期:2011-12-10 修回日期:2012-01-20 出版日期:2012-08-26 发布日期:2012-08-26
  • 通讯作者: 吕小华，硕士，副教授，广东医学院药理学教研室，广东省湛江市 524023 30817916@qq.com
  • 作者简介:陈科★，男，1979年生，河南省南阳市人，汉族，2006年广东医学院毕业，硕士，主治医师，主要从事骨科的基础与临床研究。 277615593@qq.com

Safety of the primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage

Chen Ke1, Lü Xiao-hua2, Zeng Rong1, Guo Wei-tao1, Tan Hong-chang1   

  1. 1Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical College, Zhanjiang 524001, Guangdong Province, China;
    2Department of Pharmacology, Guangdong Medical College, Zhanjiang 524023, Guangdong Province, China
  • Received:2011-12-10 Revised:2012-01-20 Online:2012-08-26 Published:2012-08-26
  • Contact: Lü Xiao-hua, Master, Associate professor, Department of Pharmacology Guangdong Medical College, Zhanjiang 524023, Guangdong Province, China 30817916@qq.com
  • About author:Chen Ke★, Master, Attending physician, Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical College, Zhanjiang 524001, Guangdong Province, China 277615593@qq.com

PDF

530

被引次数

13

摘要：

背景：初次全髋关节置换后放不放引流管还有争议。
目的：探讨初次全髋关节置换后伤口不放置引流管的安全性和有效性。
方法：92例患者按入院次序编号随机均分为单号组和双号组。单号组患者置换后放置引流管(全部为静脉输血管)；双号组患者置换后不放置引流管。通过对比两组换药次数、大腿周径变化、疼痛评分、住院时间、红细胞比容下降程度、输血量多少、不良反应发生率来评价放不放引流管效果。
结果与结论：在大腿周径变化、疼痛评分、住院时间、红细胞比容下降程度、输血量多少、不良反应发生率等方面两组差异无显著性意义；而在换药次数方面，不放置引流管患者明显少于放置引流管患者，差异有显著性意义。说明在初次全髋关节置换后不放置引流管较放置引流管效果好。

关键词: 引流管, 髋关节置换, 初次, 并发症, 疼痛评分, 安全性

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: There is controversy about whether put or not put the closed suction drainage after primary hip replacement.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and effectivity of the primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage.
METHODS: Ninety-two patients scheduled for primary hip replacement were assigned for the odd numbers group (with closed suction drainage and all of them were intravenous blood transfusion tube) and the even numbers group (without closed suction drainage). The effect of the primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage was evaluated through the comparison of the number of dressing changes, the swelling of thigh, pain scores, hospital stay, degree of hematocrit decreasing, number of blood transfusions and the rate of adverse reaction.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference of the swelling of thigh, pain scores, hospital stay, degree of hematocrit decreasing, number of blood transfusions and the rate of adverse reaction between two groups; the number of dressing changes in the even numbers group was significantly larger than that in the odd numbers group and the difference was significant. Primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage has more advantages than those with closed suction drainage.

中图分类号: