实用医学杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (21): 2770-2774.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006⁃5725.2021.21.013

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

不接触大隐静脉获取术、内镜辅助下获取大隐静脉及切开法获取大隐静脉技术获取冠脉旁路移植血管在非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术中的疗效对比研究

丁付燕 孟树萍 刘超 刘富荣 朱佳璐 胡延磊   

  1. 河南省人民医院心脏中心/华中阜外医院成人心血管外科(郑州 450003)

  • 出版日期:2021-11-10 发布日期:2021-11-10
  • 通讯作者: 胡延磊 E⁃mail:huyanlei325@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    河南省医学科技攻关项目(编号:LHGJ20200093)

A comparison of the efficacy of No⁃touch ,EVH,and OVH techniques for obtaining coronary artery bypass grafts in OPCABG patients

DING Fuyan,MENG Shuping,LIU Chao,LIU Furong,ZHU Jialu,HU Yanlei.   

  1. Heart Center of He′nan Provincial People′s Hospital,Adult Cardiovascular Surgery Intensive Care Unit of Huazhong Fuwai Hospital,Zhengzhou 450003,China

  • Online:2021-11-10 Published:2021-11-10
  • Contact: HU Yanlei E⁃mail:huyanlei325@163.com

摘要:

目的 探究不接触大隐静脉获取术(non⁃touch acquisition technology,No⁃touch)、内镜辅助下 获取大隐静脉(endoscopic vein harvesting,EVH)及传统切开法获取大隐静脉(open vein harvesting,OVH 技术获取冠脉旁路移植血管在非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(off⁃pump coronary artery bypass grafting OPCABG)中的疗效。方法 选取 2017 1 月至 2019 10 月收治的应用大隐静脉作旁路移植材料、择期 OPCABG 的患者 268 例。根据静脉获取方式分为 3 组,No⁃touch 91 例、OVH 89 例和 EVH 88 例。 观察术后切口、并发症及随访情况。结果 EVH 切口大小明显小于 No⁃touch 组、OVH 组;EVH 组围术期、 术后 6 个月及 1 年随访,腿部切口并发症发生率明显低于 No⁃touch 组、OVH 组(P < 0.05);No⁃touch 组近期 通畅率较EVH 组、OVH 组相比差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);手术时间No⁃touch 组与OVH 组在获取大隐静 脉的时间上的差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);形态结构对比,No⁃touch 组与 EVH 组较 OVH 组血管内皮细胞保留更完整。结论 三种大隐静脉获取术中,EVH 在切口大小、围术期及术后并发症方面较 No⁃touch 组、 OVH 组存在明显优势;光镜下 No⁃touch 组与 EVH 组血管内皮细胞保存更为完整,临床上 EVH 术安全性和 可行性相对较高。

关键词:

大隐静脉获取术; , 冠状旁路移植术; , 不接触大隐静脉获取术; , 内镜获取

Abstract:

Objective To explore the effect of coronary artery bypass grafting in off⁃pump coronary artery bypass grafting(OPCABG)using non⁃touch acquisition technology(No⁃touch),endoscopic⁃assisted acquisition of the great saphenous vein(EVH),and traditional incision method to obtain the great saphenous vein(OVH). Methods A total of 268 patients who were treated with the great saphenous vein as bypass graft material and elective OPCABG were selected from January 2017 to October 2019. They were divided into three groups based on the vein acquisition method,with 91 cases in the No⁃touch group,89 cases in the OVH group,and 88 cases in the EVH group. The postoperative incision,complications and follow⁃up were observed. Results The size of the EVH incision was significantly smaller than that of the No⁃touch group and the OVH group;during the perioperative 6⁃month and 1⁃year follow⁃up of the EVH group,the incidence of leg incision complications was significantly lower than that of the No⁃touch group and the OVH group(P < 0.05);the recent patency rate of the No⁃touch group was statistically significant compared with the EVH group and the OVH group(P < 0.05);the operation time of the No⁃ touch group and the OVH group were statistically different in the time to obtain the great saphenous vein Scientific significance(P < 0.05);morphological structure comparison,No⁃touch group and EVH group have more complete vascular endothelial cells than OVH group. Conclusion In the three types of great saphenous vein harvesting oper⁃ ations,EVH has obvious advantages over No⁃touch group and OVH group in terms of incision size,perioperative period and postoperative complications;No⁃touch group and EVH group have vascular endothelial cells preserva⁃tion under light microscope more complete and clinically. EVH is relatively safe and feasible.

Key words:

 , acquisition of great saphenous vein coronary bypass grafting non?touch acquisition tech? nology endoscopic acquisition