Objectives: Large-volume paracentesis (LVP) can be time and labor intensive depending on the amount of ascites removed and the method of drainage. Wall suction has been adopted as the preferred method of drainage at many centers, though the safety and benefits of this technique have not been formally evaluated. The primary objective of this study was to define the cost and time savings of wall suction over the traditional glass vacuum bottle method for ascites drainage. The secondary objective was to compare the safety profile and patient satisfaction using these two techniques.
Methods: We conducted a randomized, controlled pilot study of the wall suction versus vacuum bottle methods for LVP in hospitalized patients. All LVPs were performed under ultrasound guidance by a single proceduralist. Patients with at least 4 liters removed received 25% intravenous albumin, 8 g/liter fluid removed. Demographic, clinical characteristics, and procedure details were recorded. Laboratory and hemodynamic data were recorded for 24 h prior to and 24-48 h post LVP. An electronic chart review was conducted to evaluate procedure-related complications. Data were compared using Fisher's exact test, t test, or Mann-Whitney U test.
Results: Thirty-four patients were randomized to wall suction at 200 mmHg (n = 17) or glass vacuum bottle drainage (n = 17). Wall suction was significantly faster and less costly than vacuum bottle drainage (7 versus 15 min, p = 0.002; $4.59 versus $12.73, p < 0.001). There were no differences in outcomes at 24 and 48 h post LVP, or at 60-day follow up.
Conclusion: Performing LVP using wall suction resulted in significantly shorter procedure time and supply cost savings. There were no differences in outcomes between the groups, suggesting equivalent safety, though larger studies powered to detect small differences are needed. Given its efficiency, convenience, and cost effectiveness, wall suction may be a superior method of ascites drainage for LVP.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4107699 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756283X14532704 | DOI Listing |
Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol
December 2024
Department of Plastic Reconstructive Surgery, Senior Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, The Fourth Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Liposuction has been popular with the public since its inception. The fat accumulated in the body is sucked outside the body through negative pressure suction, thereby reducing the fat cells in the body and achieving the effect of local plasticity. Although liposuction is a relatively safe procedure, due to the lack of correct judgment of the patient's condition and treatment by quite a few cosmetic practitioners, the complications of liposuction are gradually increasing.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFHeliyon
October 2024
Department of Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, 518035, Shenzhen, China.
Background: This study aimed to introduce and evaluate a new treatment method for rectus sheath hematoma: ultrasound-guided suction using negative pressure, curettage, and percutaneous drainage.
Methods: This retrospective study involved five patients with rectus sheath hematoma rectus sheath hematoma who had cesarean sections. For all patients, ultrasound revealed that the maximum diameter of their hematoma exceeded 70 mm.
Soft Robot
December 2024
Multiscale Medical Robotics Centre Ltd., The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Sci Rep
December 2024
School of Mining and Coal, Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology, Baotou, 014010, China.
Odontology
November 2024
Department of Conservative and Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!