目的 探讨引流方式对经后路腰椎内固定术后显性及隐性失血的影响。方法 回顾分析2010-10至2012-12实施的108例经后路腰椎内固定术患者资料,按术后引流方式不同分成普通引流组(56例)和低负压引流组(52例),统计分析两组患者术前、术后血常规,以及术中、术后失血、输血情况,评估术后显性失血、隐性失血情况。结果 普通引流组围术期总失血量(1415.10±592.66)ml,其中显性失血量为(860.62±375.45)ml,隐性失血量为(516.73±314.71)ml;低负压引流组围术期总失血量为(1251.53±540.99)ml,其中显性失血量为(794.17±337.19)ml,隐性失血量(457.36±332.79)ml。普通引流组和低负压引流组两组之间术后显性失血量,隐性失血量比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05);隐性失血量占总失血量的比值无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论 两种引流方式对经后路腰椎内固定术后隐性及显性失血量的影响无统计学差异。

Objective To analyze the obvious and hidden blood loss after operations in the posterior lumbar intervertebral fusion(PLIF) by two drainage methods, and compare the effect of the two kinds of drainage.Methods From October 2008 to December 2012, retrospective analysis of 108 patients undergoing treatment of the PLIF was carried out. According to the kind of drainage method after PLIF, they were randomly divided into two groups. 56 patients received ordinary drainage method, 52 patients underwent low suction drainage method. Statistics was applied to comparison analysis of the two groups in terms of total blood loss,visible blood loss,hidden blood loss,and transfusion.Results In the ordinary drainage group: the mean blood loss of (860.62?375.45) ml was found in 56 cases after operation; the mean total blood loss was(1415.10?592.66) ml while the hidden blood loss was (516.73?314.71) ml,36% of the total loss. In the low-suction drainage group: the mean blood loss of (794.17?337.19) ml was found in 52 cases after operation; the mean total blood loss was(1251.53?540.99)ml and the hidden blood loss was (457.36?332.79) ml,35% of the total loss. There were no statistical differences between the two groups.Conclusions The ordinary drainage and the low-suction drainage may have no difference in hidden blood loss after operations.