摘要
目的比较高负压引流与常规引流对人工髋关节置换术后失血量与切口愈合的影响,以期为临床合理选择提供依据。方法回顾性分析2017年1月至2018年12月在本院行髋关节置换手术的85例患者的临床资料,根据术后引流方式的不同,将患者分为高负压引流组(A组,44例)和常规引流组(B组,41例),比较两种方式的术后血红蛋白量(HGB)和红细胞比容(HCT)、术后引流量和总失血量、术后切口愈合时间、切口并发症发生率、切口感染率、术后VAS评分等指标。结果两组患者均获得随访,随访时间1~3个月。高负压引流组术后HGB为(96.71±10.21)g/L、术后HCT为(30.15%±3.69%),均低于常规引流组术后HGB(105.93±11.08)g/L、术后HCT(34.90%±4.11%);高负压引流组术后引流量为(394.36±101.23)mL、总失血量为(1180.23±150.15)mL,均高于常规引流组术后引流量(221.24±75.53)mL、总失血量(1006.92±162.32)mL;高负压引流组术后切口愈合时间(15.73±3.75)d、切口并发症发生率(6.82%,3/44)和术后VAS评分(2.38±0.76)分均低于常规引流组术后切口愈合时间(18.53±4.38)d、切口并发症发生率(19.51%,8/41)和术后VAS评分(2.90±0.84)分,以上指标比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者在切口感染率方面比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论人工髋关节置换术后高负压引流较常规引流切口愈合快、并发症少和疼痛轻,但术后HGB和HCT低,引流量和失血量大,应根据患者具体情况选择应用。
Objective To compare the effects of high negative pressure and conventional drainage on blood loss and wound healing in the patients after artificial hip replacement,provide a basis for clinical rational selection.Methods Retrospective analysis of clinical data of patients undergoing artificial hip replacement surgery between January 2017 and December 2018 in our hospital,according to the different methods of postoperative drainage,the patients were divided into high negative pressure drainage group(group A,44 cases)and conventional drainage group(group B,41 cases).Comparing the two drainage methods of postoperative hemoglobin(HGB)and hematocrit(HCT),postoperative drainage and total blood loss,postoperative incision healing time,incision complication rate,incision infection rate and postoperative VAS score.Results Both groups were followed up for 1 to 3 months,the HGB of the high negative pressure drainage group was(96.71±10.21)g/L,and the postoperative HCT was(30.15%±3.69%),which were lower than that of the conventional drainage group[HGB(105.93±11.08)g/L,HCT(34.90%±4.11%)].The drainage volume of the high negative pressure drainage group was(394.36±101.23)m L and the total blood loss was(1180.23±150.15)m L,which were higher than that of the conventional drainage group[drainage volume(221.24±75.53)m L,total blood loss(1006.92±162.32)m L].In the high negative pressure drainage group,the incision healing time(15.73±3.75)d,the incision complication rate(6.82%,3/44)and the postoperative VAS score(2.38±0.76)were lower than those in incision healing time(18.53±4.38)d,incision complication rate(19.51%,8/41)and postoperative VAS score(2.90±0.84)of the conventional drainage group,the above differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the infection rate between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion High negative pressure drainage is faster,less complications and less pain than conventional drainage incision after artificial hip replacement,but postoperative HGB and HCT are low,the amount of drainage and blood loss is large,the application should be selected according to the patient’s specific circumstances.
作者
豆敏
王飞
李维萍
黄强
Dou Min;Wang Fei;Li Weiping;Huang Qiang(The 940th Hospital of Joint Logistics Support Force of Chinese People's Liberation Army,Lanzhou Gansu,730050,China)
出处
《生物骨科材料与临床研究》
CAS
2019年第6期35-38,共4页
Orthopaedic Biomechanics Materials and Clinical Study
基金
国家自然科学基金青年项目(81600700)
关键词
人工髋关节置换
高负压引流
失血量
切口愈合
Artificial hip replacement
High-negative pressure drainage
Blood loss
Wound healing
作者简介
豆敏(1989-),女,本科,主管护师。研究方向:骨与关节损伤;通信作者:黄强(1989-),男,博士,主治医师。研究方向:骨与关节损伤。
