双管接负压吸引器引流与传统胸带加压包扎法在乳房下脂肪筋膜瓣保乳整形术中的应用比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2023.12.019

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (0)

全文: PDF (1198 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 目的: 探究双管接负压吸引器引流与传统胸带加压包扎法在乳房下脂肪筋膜瓣保乳整形术中的应用效果。方法: 回顾性选取2020年1月至2023年1月在我院接受乳房下脂肪筋膜瓣保乳整形术的患者98例,根据患者的治疗方案将患者分为两组:研究组(n=49)采用双管接负压吸引器引流,对照组(n=49)采用传统胸带加压包扎法引流,对患者进行3个月随访,记录患者术后胸壁拔管时间、腋窝拔管时间、胸壁引流量、腋窝引流量、生命质量测定量表评分、简明疼痛量表(BPI)评分,观察患者术后皮瓣坏死情况、淋巴水肿发生情况及舒适度评分。结果: 两组患者术后胸壁拔管时间、腋窝拔管时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),研究组患者的胸壁引流量、腋窝引流量低于对照组(P<0.05)。两组患者术前的FACT-B、BPI评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),研究组术前术后FACT-B、BPI评分变化幅度大于对照组(P<0.05)。与对照组患者相比,研究组患者皮瓣坏死发生率较低,且高级别皮瓣坏死发生率比对照组低(P<0.05)。对照组、研究组患者淋巴水肿发生率及严重程度比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术前两组间舒适度评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与对照组相比,研究组患者术后1d、1月、3月的舒适度均较高(P<0.05)。结论: 双管接负压吸引器引流在乳房下脂肪筋膜瓣保乳整形术后引流效果、疼痛缓解方面优于传统胸带加压包扎法,可以其舒适度及生活质量,降低术后皮瓣坏死、淋巴水肿并发症发生。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	王俏
	边丽娜
	仇慧敏

关键词 ：双管接负压吸引器引流, 传统胸带加压包扎法, 乳房下脂肪筋膜瓣保乳整形术, 术后引流量, 皮瓣坏死率

Abstract：Objective: To explore the application effects of double-tube negative pressure drainage and traditional chest bandage compression in breast-conserving reconstruction surgery with subcutaneous fat fascial flap. Methods: A total of 98 patients who underwent breast-conserving reconstruction surgery with subcutaneous fat fascial flap in our hospital from January 2020 to January 2023 were retrospectively selected. Patients were divided into two groups according to their treatment plans: the study group (n=49) received double-tube negative pressure drainage, and the control group (n=49) received traditional chest bandage compression drainage. Patients were followed up for 3 months, and postoperative chest tube removal time, axillary tube removal time, chest drainage volume, axillary drainage volume, FACT-B score, Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) score were recorded. Postoperative flap necrosis, occurrence of lymphedema, and comfort scores were observed. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in chest tube removal time and axillary tube removal time between the two groups (P>0.05). The chest drainage volume and axillary drainage volume in the study group were lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in FACT-B and BPI scores before surgery between the two groups (P>0.05). The change in FACT-B and BPI scores before and after surgery in the study group was greater than that in the control group (P<0.05). Compared with the control group, the study group had a lower incidence of flap necrosis, and the incidence of high-grade flap necrosis was lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence and severity of lymphedema between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in comfort scores between the two groups before surgery (P>0.05). Compared with the control group, the study group had higher comfort scores at 1 day, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery (P<0.05). Conclusion: Double-tube negative pressure drainage in breast-conserving reconstruction surgery with subcutaneous fat fascial flap is superior to traditional chest bandage compression in terms of drainage efficiency and pain relief. It improves comfort and quality of life, reduces postoperative flap necrosis, and minimizes complications such as lymphedema.

Key words： Double-tube negative pressure drainage Traditional chest bandage compression dressing Breast conserving plastic surgery with submammary fatty fascia flap Postoperative diversion flow Flap necrosis rate

基金资助:陕西省自然科学基础研究计划项目,(编号:2019JM-553)

引用本文:

王俏, 边丽娜, 仇慧敏. 双管接负压吸引器引流与传统胸带加压包扎法在乳房下脂肪筋膜瓣保乳整形术中的应用比较[J]. 河北医学, 2023, 29(12): 2039-2043.
WANG Qiao, BIAN Lina, QIU Huimin. Comparison of the Application of Double-Tube Negative Pressure Drainage and Traditional Chest Bandage Compression in Breast-Conserving Reconstruction Surgery with Subcutaneous Fat Fascial Flap. HeBei Med, 2023, 29(12): 2039-2043.

链接本文:

http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2023.12.019 或 http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/CN/Y2023/V29/I12/2039

[1] 郭磊,李婷婷,袁媛,等.容量移位和容量替代技术在乳腺癌保乳术中的应用及对预后的影响[J].中国美容医学,2023,32(3):42-45.
[2] Farbood A,Sahmeddini MA,Bayat S,et al.The effect of preoperative depression and anxiety on heart rate variability in women with breast cancer[J].Breast cancer:the journal of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society,2020,27(5):912-918.
[3] 龚智逊,徐英,吕莉萍,等.负压淋巴回流促进系统联合结构性康复训练对乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结清扫术后上肢淋巴水肿和生存质量的影响[J].中国医学前沿杂志(电子版),2021,13(6):58-62.
[4] 万崇华,张冬梅,汤学良,等.乳腺癌患者生命质量测定量表FACT-B中文版介绍[J].中国肿瘤,2002,11(6):318-320.
[5] 高丽萍,陈典璇,韩富莲,等.中文版简明疼痛量表在癌症患者中内在一致性和重测信度分析[J].军医进修学院学报,2010,31(10):1009-1011.
[6] 吕素红,胡学慧,刘荣琴.Kolcaba1K的舒适理论及实践应用[J].河北医药,2012,34(21):3312-3314.
[7] 张雪,董晓平,管雅喆,等.女性乳腺癌流行病学趋势及危险因素研究进展[J].肿瘤防治研究,2021,48(1):87-92.
[8] Minami CA,Kantor O,Weiss A,et al.Association between time to operation and pathologic stage in ductal carcinoma in situ and early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer[J].Journal of the American College of Surgeons,2020,231(4):434-438.
[9] Mohsenikia M,Khalighfard S,Alizadeh AM,et al.An innovative systematic approach introduced the involved incRNA-miR-mRNA network in cell cycle and proliferation after conventional treatments in breast cancer patients[J].Cell Cycle,2022,21(16):1753-1774.
[10] 俎彩霞,常冬华,吴雷娟,等.负压淋巴回流促进系统对肥胖乳腺癌根治术后上肢淋巴水肿患者的临床运用分析[J].中国地方病防治杂志,2022,37(4):348-349.
[11] 鲁雅琴,邢文婷,葛永桂,等.负压淋巴回流促进系统和徒手淋巴引流治疗乳腺癌术后上肢淋巴水肿的疗效比较[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志,2021,43(2):165-169.
[12] Hagiwara Y,Sawaki M,Uemura Y,et al.Impact of chemotherapy on cognitive functioning in older patients with HER2-positive breast cancer:a sub-study in the RESPECT trial[J].Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.,2021,188(3):675-683.