【摘要】：背景:氨甲環(huán)酸能夠明顯減少髖、膝關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)圍手術(shù)期失血,但氨甲環(huán)酸的給藥方式存在諸多爭(zhēng)議。目的:探討初次單側(cè)髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)后關(guān)節(jié)囊周圍注射氨甲環(huán)酸對(duì)失血量和關(guān)節(jié)功能的有效性和安全性。方法:應(yīng)用回顧性研究方法對(duì)冀中能源峰峰集團(tuán)邯鄲院區(qū)2013年1月至2016年1月選取股骨頭壞死合并髖關(guān)節(jié)骨性關(guān)節(jié)炎行初次單側(cè)全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)的243例患者,男性131例,女性112例,年齡55~70歲平均年齡(62.2±4.1)歲。86例術(shù)中縫合前關(guān)節(jié)囊周圍注射1g氨甲環(huán)酸(氨甲環(huán)酸注射組),82例于手術(shù)切口前20分鐘靜點(diǎn)1g氨甲環(huán)酸生理鹽水50ml(氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組),75例未使用氨甲環(huán)酸(無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組)。記錄三組患者術(shù)中失血量、術(shù)中輸血量、術(shù)中輸血率、手術(shù)時(shí)間和術(shù)后24小時(shí)引流量、術(shù)后輸血量、術(shù)后輸血率、術(shù)后血栓形成情況、術(shù)后髖關(guān)節(jié)Harris評(píng)分,計(jì)算三組患者總失血量和隱性失血量。結(jié)果:所有患者均順利完成手術(shù),圍手術(shù)期未發(fā)生切口感染、不愈合、脂肪液化壞死等手術(shù)并發(fā)癥,無(wú)氨甲環(huán)酸副作用出現(xiàn)。三組病例性別、年齡、體重指數(shù)、病程、側(cè)別、手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)前血容量、術(shù)中失血量、術(shù)中輸血率無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。術(shù)后輸血量:氨甲環(huán)酸注射組、氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組、無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05);其中氨甲環(huán)酸注射組與氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05)。術(shù)后輸血率:氨甲環(huán)酸注射組、氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組、無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05);其中氨甲環(huán)酸注射組與氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05)。術(shù)后隱性失血量:氨甲環(huán)酸注射組、氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組、無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05);其中氨甲環(huán)酸注射組與氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05)。術(shù)后引流量:氨甲環(huán)酸注射組、氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組、無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05);其中氨甲環(huán)酸注射組與氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05)�？偸а�:氨甲環(huán)酸注射組、氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組、無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05);其中氨甲環(huán)酸注射組與氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05)。氨甲環(huán)酸注射組、氨甲環(huán)酸靜滴組、無(wú)藥物干預(yù)組術(shù)后髖關(guān)節(jié)Harris評(píng)分比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05)。結(jié)論:全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)中關(guān)節(jié)囊周圍注射和靜滴氨甲環(huán)酸均可減少術(shù)后失血量、術(shù)后輸血量、降低術(shù)后輸血率,未增加患肢靜脈血栓風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。兩種給藥方式對(duì)術(shù)后輸血量、術(shù)后失血量、術(shù)后輸血率無(wú)明顯差別。關(guān)節(jié)囊周圍注射氨甲環(huán)酸對(duì)術(shù)后髖關(guān)節(jié)功能無(wú)影響。
[Abstract]:Background: tranexamic acid can significantly reduce perioperative blood loss in hip and knee arthroplasty. Objective: to investigate the efficacy and safety of peri-capsular injection of aminoformic acid on blood loss and joint function after primary unilateral hip arthroplasty. Methods: from January 2013 to January 2016, 243 patients (131 males) with osteonecrosis of femoral head and osteoarthritis of hip joint underwent the first unilateral total hip arthroplasty in Handan Hospital of Jizhong Energy Fengfeng Group. 112 women, The mean age of 5570 years was (62.2 鹵4.1) years old. 86 patients with intraoperative injection of 1 g methocylic acid around the articular capsule (methocycline injection group) and 82 patients with intraoperative intraarticular capsule injection of 1 g 50ml (intraoperative intraarticular injection group) without intraoperative injection of methachlorocylic acid (50ml) were performed 20 minutes before the incision. Use carbamicylic acid (no drug intervention group). The blood loss, blood transfusion rate, operation time, 24 hours drainage rate, blood transfusion rate, postoperative thrombus formation, postoperative hip joint Harris score were recorded in the three groups. Total blood loss and hidden blood loss were calculated in the three groups. Results: all the patients completed the operation successfully. No incision infection, nonunion, fat liquefaction and necrosis were found in perioperative period. Gender, age, body mass index, course of disease, side, operation time, preoperative blood volume, intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion rate were not statistically significant in the three groups (P0.05). The amount of blood transfusion after operation: methacylic acid injection group, methacylic acid intravenous drip group, no drug intervention group compared with statistical difference (P0.05); Ammonocycline injection group and methacylic acid intravenous drip group had no statistical difference (P0.05). Postoperative blood transfusion rate: methacylic acid injection group, methacylic acid intravenous drip group, no drug intervention group compared with statistical difference (P0.05); Ammonocycline injection group and methacylic acid intravenous drip group had no statistical difference (P0.05). The amount of recessive blood loss was significantly different between the two groups (P0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). Postoperative drainage: methacylic acid injection group, methacylic acid intravenous drip group, no drug intervention group compared with statistical difference (P0.05); Ammonocyclic acid injection group and methacylic acid intravenous drip group had no statistical difference (P0.05). Total blood loss: methacylic acid injection group, methacylic acid intravenous drip group, no drug intervention group compared with statistical difference (P0.05); Ammonocyclic acid injection group and methacylic acid intravenous drip group had no statistical difference (P0.05). There was no significant difference in Harris score of hip joint between the two groups (P0.05). Conclusion: periarticular injection and intravenous drip of carbamoic acid in total hip arthroplasty can reduce postoperative blood loss, blood transfusion volume and blood transfusion rate, but do not increase the risk of venous thrombosis in the affected limbs. There was no significant difference in blood transfusion, blood loss and blood transfusion rate between the two methods. The postoperative hip function was not affected by intra-articular injection of carbamoic acid.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：R687.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 姚歡;謝錦偉;岳辰;馬俊;裴福興;;多次重復(fù)靜脈應(yīng)用氨甲環(huán)酸減少初次全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)失血有效性與安全性的前瞻性對(duì)照研究[J];中國(guó)骨與關(guān)節(jié)雜志;2016年12期

2 倪進(jìn)榮;王立新;陳新軍;;氨甲環(huán)酸的不同給藥方式對(duì)減少初次全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)后隱性出血的病例對(duì)照研究[J];中國(guó)骨傷;2016年08期

3 王百盛;劉欣偉;張敬東;韓文鋒;王寧;劉海立;;靜脈聯(lián)合局部應(yīng)用氨甲環(huán)酸對(duì)人工全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)失血量影響[J];創(chuàng)傷與急危重病醫(yī)學(xué);2016年04期

4 謝美兆;練偉東;張浩;張智勉;郭達(dá);;全髖置換局部應(yīng)用氨甲環(huán)酸后輸血及成本效益分析[J];實(shí)用骨科雜志;2016年05期

5 顧建明;李為;杜輝;邵宏翊;周一新;;氨甲環(huán)酸對(duì)減少同期雙側(cè)全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)圍術(shù)期出血的療效[J];武警醫(yī)學(xué);2016年02期

6 朱燦;儲(chǔ)小兵;章建華;;氨甲環(huán)酸3種不同應(yīng)用方法對(duì)全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)失血量的影響[J];江西中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2016年01期

7 趙清斌;任姜棟;張曉崗;吾湖孜·吾拉木;;氨甲環(huán)酸靜脈或局部及聯(lián)合應(yīng)用初次單側(cè)全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換:圍置換期出血及輸血率的比較[J];中國(guó)組織工程研究;2016年04期

8 施林軍;曹揚(yáng);姜丹生;;不同劑量氨甲環(huán)酸對(duì)初次全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換失血量的影響[J];臨床骨科雜志;2015年04期

9 孫景東;龔泰芳;盧云;陳文;劉小濤;謝易;;氨甲環(huán)酸不同給藥時(shí)間對(duì)全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)中及術(shù)后失血量的影響[J];骨科;2015年03期

10 孫程;陸海明;呂杰;馬金忠;;氨甲環(huán)酸在初次全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù)中的應(yīng)用[J];中國(guó)矯形外科雜志;2015年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：2231742