Effect of three different Central venous catheter on blood flow infection in patients with parenteral nutrition
三种不同静脉导管在肠外营养患者中相关性血流感染的效果分析

摘要

目的 探究三种不同中心静脉导管在肠外营养患者中相关性血流感染的效果。方法 选取 2022.1- 2023.1 期间我院收治的需要进行肠外营养的患者 210 例，随机分为留置针组（70 例，使用留置针）、CVC 组 （70 例，使用深静脉置管）和 PICC 组（70 例，使用经外周穿刺中心静脉导管），对比三组置管成功率、静脉导 管留置时间和相关性血流感染率。结果 PICC 组的置管成功率明显高于留置针组和 CVC 组，差异具有统计学意 义（p＜0.05）；PICC 组的静脉导管留置时间明显长于留置针组和 CVC 组，差异具有统计学意义（p＜0.05）； PICC 组的相关性血流感染率明显低于留置针组和 CVC 组，差异具有统计学意义（p＜0.05）。结论 经外周穿刺 中心静脉导管对比留置针和深静脉置管针对肠外营养患者的效果更好，置管成功率更高，静脉导管留置时间更 长，相关性血流感染的发生率更低，值得临床推广应用。

Abstract

Objective To explore the effect of three different Central venous catheter in patients with parenteral nutrition related blood flow infection.
Methods 210 patients who need parenteral nutrition in our hospital during 2022.1- 2023.1 were randomly divided into three groups: indwelling needle group (70 cases, using indwelling needle), CVC group (70 cases, using Deep vein catheterization) and PICC group (70 cases, using Central venous catheter through peripheral puncture).
Results The success rate of catheterization in the PICC group was significantly higher than that in the indwelling needle group and CVC group, with a statistically significant difference (p<0.05); The indwelling time of venous catheters in the PICC group was significantly longer than that in the indwelling needle group and CVC group, with a statistically significant difference (p<0.05); The incidence of blood flow infection in the PICC group was significantly lower than that in the indwelling needle group and CVC group, with a statistically significant difference (p<0.05).
Conclusion   Compared with indwelling needle and Deep vein indwelling tube, Central venous catheter through peripheral puncture is more effective for parenteral nutrition patients, with higher success rate of indwelling tube, longer indwelling time of venous catheter, and lower incidence of related blood flow infection, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.