中国肝脏病杂志(电子版)

位置：首页 >> 期刊文章

耐高压注射型经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管与中心静脉导管在肝细胞癌肝切除术患者中的应用

作者：张萌1 白艳1 李雪莲1 咸冬梅1 徐灿丽1 赫嵘2

单位：1. 首都医科大学附属北京地坛医院放射科北京 100015 2.首都医科大学附属北京地坛医院普通外科北京 100015

分类号：

出版年,卷(期):页码：2023,15(2):68-72

摘要：

摘要：目的比较耐高压注射型经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（peripherally inserted central
catheter， PICC）与中心静脉导管（central venous catheters， CVC）在肝细胞癌患者行肝
切除术后的应用效果。方法回顾性分析2019年1月至2020年10月在首都医科大学附属北
京地坛医院行肝切除术的70例肝细胞癌患者的临床资料。根据放置静脉导管的方式将其
分为耐高压注射型PICC组（36例）和CVC组（34例）。分析两组患者静脉穿刺次数、
插管成功率、导管留置时间以及导管相关并发症发生情况。采用Logistic回归分析耐高压
注射型PICC相关性感染的危险因素。结果耐高压注射型PICC组导管留置时间显著长于
CVC组（中位数： 14 d vs 7 d； z = -4.983， P ＜ 0.001），两组导管相关并发症发生率无
显著差异 [31%（11/36） vs 41%（14/34）； χ2 = 0.859， P = 0.354]。耐高压注射型PICC
组最常见的并发症为静脉炎（5例），而在B组中未观察到静脉炎的发生（χ2 = 3.207，
P = 0.073）。耐高压注射型PICC组中无患者因无法耐受而要求拔除导管， CVC组中有6
例（17.6%）患者因自觉不适而要求提前拔除CVC导管（χ2 = 6.948， P = 0.008），提示耐
高压注射型PICC组耐受性显著好于CVC组。导管留置时间为耐高压注射型PICC相关性
感染的独立危险因素（OR = 1.393， 95% CI： 1.052～1.846， P = 0.021）。结论对于肝切
除术后的肝细胞癌患者的静脉输液治疗，耐高压注射型PICC优于CVC。

Abstract: Objective To compare the effects of power peripherally inserted central catheter
(PICC) and central venous catheters (CVC) on hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing
hepatectomy. Methods The clinical data of 70 patients who underwent hepatectomy in
Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University from January 2019 to October 2020 were
retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into power PICC group (36 cases) and
CVC group (34 cases) according to the way the venous catheter was placed. The number
of venipunctures, intubation success rate, catheter retention time and catheter-related
complications were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to analyze the risk factors for
infection in power PICC group. Results The median duration of venous catheterization
in power PICC group was signifcantly longer than that in CVC group B (14 d vs 7 d; z =

-4.983, P ＜ 0.001). There was no signifcant difference in the incidence of catheter-related
complications between the two groups [31% (11/36) vs 41% (14/34); χ2 = 0.859, P = 0.354].
Phlebitis is the most common complication in power PICC group (5 cases), but not observed
in CVC group (χ2 = 3.207, P = 0.073). No patient in the power PICC group required catheter
removal due to intolerance, while 6 patients (17.6%) in the CVC group required catheter
removal in advance due to discomfort (χ2 = 6.948, P = 0.008), indicating that the tolerance of
the power PICC group was signifcantly better than that of CVC group. The catheter retention
time was the independent risk factor for catheter-related infections (OR = 1.393, 95%CI:
1.052～1.846, P = 0.021). Conclusions Power PICC is superior to CVC for intravenous
infusion therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after liver resection.

基金项目：

作者简介：

参考文献：

服务与反馈：

【文章下载】【加入收藏】