目的：通过经外周静脉穿刺中心静脉置管（PICC）或锁骨下静脉置管与前臂静脉留置针在血液病患者并发深部真菌感染时应用两性霉素B中的比较，探讨如何减少患者静脉炎及并发症发生率和再次静脉穿刺的发生率，从而提高患者生活质量。方法：80例血液病患者分为两组，40例PICC置管或锁骨下静脉置管组为A组，40例前臂静脉留置针为B组，记录静脉炎、疼痛发生情况、留置时间。结果：A组留置时间30～68天，B组留置时间1～5天；A组静脉炎率5%，B组静脉炎率45%；A组疼痛率5%，B组疼痛率35%；结论：在血液病患者并发深部真菌感染时应用两性霉素B治疗中，选用PICC置管或锁骨下静脉置管效果明显优于前臂静脉留置针，值得临床推广。
Objective To study the catheter-related infection (CRI) in cancer patients treated with central venous catheterization. Methods A prospective study with 196 cancer patients was conducted to analyze the types of catheter-related infection and pathogen, as well as the relationship between CRI and the following factors: insert location, gender, age, remained time, or bone marrow suppression. Results Of the total 196 cases, 16 cases were diagnosed as CRI and the CRI rate was 8.2%. The types of CRI were five cases of pathogen colonization, four cases of insert location infection and seven cases of catheter-related bloodstream infection. Of the total 244 specimens, 20 were positive including 7 pathogenic bacteria in either Gram positive or Gram negative types, the dominating pathogens were staphylococcus aureus, staphylococcus epidermidis, acinetobacter baumannii and klebsiella pneumoniae. CRI was related to both insert location and age which were both the independent risk factors. Conclusion The concept of prevention should be set up, and the comprehensive measures should be taken to reduce CRI, such as choosing an appropriate insert location and complying with a strict catheter insert standard.
Objective To investigate the role of low-dose heparin added to total nutrient admixture (TNA) solutions in the prevention of catheter related infections (CRIs). Methods One-hundred three newborn infants with periph-erally inserted central catheter (PICC) were divided into heparin group (n=63) and control group (n=40). The patients in the heparin group received TNA with 0.5 U/ ml heparin. The patients in the control group received TNA without heparin. We retrospectively analyzed the incidence of CRTs in the two groups. Results We found that the incidence of CRIs was 0 in the heparin group and 12.5% (5/40) in the control group. The incidence of catheter obstruction was 6.3% (4/63) in the heparin group and 20% (8/40) in the control group. The incidence of catheter-tip colonization was 1.58% (1/40) in the heparin group and 17.5% (7/40) in the control group. The incidences of CRIs, catheter obstruction, and catheter-tip colonization were signiicantly lower in the heparin group than those in the control group (Plt;0.05). Conclusion TNA solutions with 0.5U/ml heparin have decreased catheter obstruction and CRIs.
目的 讨论B型超声定位下颈内静脉穿刺置管的经验。方法 回顾我中心2008年11月至2009年4月期间采用B型超声定位行颈内静脉置管的286例患者的临床资料。结果 一次性穿刺成功率为99.3%（284/286），置管成功率为100%（286/286）； 穿刺时间50 s~12 min，平均106.8 s； 带管时间5～64 d，平均13 d； 未出现血气胸、皮下血肿等并发症。结论 B型超声定位下颈内静脉穿刺操作简单、方便、安全，适用于各级别医院。在颈短肥胖，被动体位情况下，B型超声定位下置管优势大于传统的盲探法及彩色多普勒超声引导下置管法。
Objective To evaluate the flushing effects of normal saline (NS) and heparin saline (HPS) after central venous catheterization. Methods We searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 12, 2015), CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the flushing effects of NS versus HPS after central venous catheterization from inception to December 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Results A total of 12 RCTs involving 2 092 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that no significant differences were found between the two groups in occlusion rate (OR=1.58, 95%CI 0.79 to 3.14,P=0.19) and the catheter days (OR=–7.24, 95%CI –22.90 to 8.41,P=0.36), while the HPS group had more advantage than the NS group in decreasing the incidence of phlebitis (OR=2.57, 95%CI 1.52 to 4.34,P=0.000 4). Subgroup analysis revealed that HPS provided more superiority over NS in lessening the occlusion rate (OR=1.85, 95%CI 1.22 to 2.80,P=0.004), no significant difference was found when comparing NS to 10 units, and 100 units HPS (10 units: OR=1.51, 95%CI 0.94 to 2.43,P=0.09; 100 units: OR=1.51, 95%CI 0.63 to 3.60,P=0.09). Conclusion HPS appears to be more beneficial than NS, larger rigorously studies are needed for better understanding on the effects of NS and HPS.