RESULTS OF PERCUTANEOUS TREATMENT OF LIMITED FLUID FORMATIONS AFTER ABDOMINAL SURGERY.

Q4 Medicine
Georgian medical news Pub Date : 2024-07-01
I Yusubov
{"title":"RESULTS OF PERCUTANEOUS TREATMENT OF LIMITED FLUID FORMATIONS AFTER ABDOMINAL SURGERY.","authors":"I Yusubov","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>The purpose of the study: </strong>Evaluation of the results of percutaneous drainage in the treatment of visceral and non-visceral fluid formations that developed in the abdominal cavity in the postoperative period.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The study involved 64 patients who underwent percutaneous drainage under ultrasound control, and 30 patients who underwent open surgical drainage. The clinical variables were analyzed along with the results of the interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average hospital stay of patients who underwent open surgical drainage (11.10±3.42 days) was longer than that of patients who underwent percutaneous drainage (9.13±1.63 days). The average time of temperature decrease during percutaneous drainage was 4.31±1.75 days, and with open surgical drainage -4.94±2.01 days. Percutaneous drainage was successful in 96.8% of patients, and an unsuccessful result was observed in 3.2% of patients. In patients who underwent open surgical drainage, these rates were 80% and 20%, respectively. Compared with percutaneous drainage, complications were more frequent in patients who underwent open surgical drainage and amounted to 12.4% and 16.7%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Percutaneous drainage under ultrasound control has a lower mortality rate compared to open surgical drainage, as well as reduces hospital stay and in most cases can replace drainage with traditional open or laparoscopic intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":12610,"journal":{"name":"Georgian medical news","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgian medical news","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of the study: Evaluation of the results of percutaneous drainage in the treatment of visceral and non-visceral fluid formations that developed in the abdominal cavity in the postoperative period.

Material and methods: The study involved 64 patients who underwent percutaneous drainage under ultrasound control, and 30 patients who underwent open surgical drainage. The clinical variables were analyzed along with the results of the interventions.

Results: The average hospital stay of patients who underwent open surgical drainage (11.10±3.42 days) was longer than that of patients who underwent percutaneous drainage (9.13±1.63 days). The average time of temperature decrease during percutaneous drainage was 4.31±1.75 days, and with open surgical drainage -4.94±2.01 days. Percutaneous drainage was successful in 96.8% of patients, and an unsuccessful result was observed in 3.2% of patients. In patients who underwent open surgical drainage, these rates were 80% and 20%, respectively. Compared with percutaneous drainage, complications were more frequent in patients who underwent open surgical drainage and amounted to 12.4% and 16.7%, respectively.

Conclusion: Percutaneous drainage under ultrasound control has a lower mortality rate compared to open surgical drainage, as well as reduces hospital stay and in most cases can replace drainage with traditional open or laparoscopic intervention.

经皮治疗腹部手术后局限性积液形成的结果。
研究目的评估经皮引流术治疗术后腹腔内形成的内脏和非内脏积液的效果:研究涉及 64 名在超声控制下接受经皮引流术的患者和 30 名接受开放手术引流术的患者。结果:接受超声控制下经皮引流术的患者平均住院时间比接受开腹手术引流术的患者短:结果:接受开放手术引流的患者平均住院时间(11.10±3.42 天)长于接受经皮引流的患者(9.13±1.63 天)。经皮引流的平均体温下降时间为(4.31±1.75)天,而开放手术引流的平均体温下降时间为(-4.94±2.01)天。96.8%的患者经皮引流成功,3.2%的患者引流失败。在接受开放手术引流的患者中,成功率分别为 80% 和 20%。与经皮引流术相比,开放手术引流术患者的并发症发生率更高,分别为 12.4% 和 16.7%:结论:与开腹手术引流相比,超声控制下的经皮引流死亡率更低,而且可以缩短住院时间,在大多数情况下可以取代传统的开腹或腹腔镜手术引流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Georgian medical news
Georgian medical news Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
207
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信