摘要
【目的】对比研究Amplatzer堵闭器(ADO)与外科手术治疗动脉导管未闭(PDA)的疗效,探讨ADO治疗PDA的临床价值。【方法】1998年11月-2004年1月在我院采用Amplatzer堵闭器介入治疗的PDA患者31例,同期采用外科手术法治疗的PDA患者32例。采用病例对照研究的方法,比较两种方法的疗效、主要并发症等。【结果】两种疗法的成功率(介入组93.3%、外科组100%)、主要并发症发生率(介入组14.3%、外科组12.5%)无显著性差异(P>0.05)。外科组接受输血、呼吸机辅助通气各8例,介入组无1例接受输血和呼吸机辅助通气;术后住院时间介入组2～7(4.7±1.4)d,外科组7～23(10.9±3.5)d。两组比较均有显著性差异(P<0.05)。【结论】Amplatzer法治疗PDA安全可靠,疗效与外科手术相似,较外科方法创伤小、术后住院时间短,在适应证范围内,可作为治疗PDA的合适方法。
[Objective] To compare the clinical effectiveness of transcatheter Amplatzer Ductus Occluder （ADO） with that of surgical closure of patent ductus arteriosus （PDA）, and to evaluate the feasibility of transcatheter PDA closure using ADO. [Methods] From Nov. 1998 to Jan. 2004, 31 patients （12 males , 19 females） underwent transcatheter PDA closure using ADO, and 32 patents （10 males, 22 females） underwent surgical closure of PDA. The case-control study was adopted to evaluate the success rate and major complication rate, et al. [ Results ] The success rate was 93.3% in ADO group and 100% in surgical group, the major complication rate were 14.3% and 12.5% respectively, and there were no significant difference in the comparison of success rate and complication rate （P 〉0.05）, however, in surgical group, 8 patients （25%） accepted blood transfusion （150 mL±125 mL） and 8 patients （25%） needed assisted respiration （40min to 6 days）. The length of postoperative hospital stay were （4.7±1.4）d in ADO group and （10.9±3.5）d in surgical group. There were significant differences in the comparison of blood transfusion rate, assisted respiration rate and the length of postoperative hospital stay （P〈 0.05）. [Conclusions] Transcatheter closure of PDA using ADO is an ideal procedure within acceptable limits owing to its reliability, safety, min-invasiveness and short hospitalization.
出处
《中山大学学报（医学科学版）》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2006年第4期452-454,F0004,共4页
Journal of Sun Yat-Sen University:Medical Sciences
关键词
动脉导管未闭
介入治疗
心脏外科手术
对比研究
patent ducts arteriosus
interventional therapy
cardiac surgical procedure
comparative study
