论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨在房间隔缺损合并房间隔瘤患者介入封堵手术中,使用超声心动图预测房间隔缺损封堵器型号大小的可行性。方法回顾性分析我院成功进行封堵治疗的房间隔缺损合并房间隔瘤患者62例,对比手术前与手术中超声心动图测量房间隔缺损大小的差别,并与所选择房间隔缺损封堵器型号大小进行比较,对术前、术中测值与封堵器型号大小进行相关性分析。结果 62例房间隔缺损合并房间隔瘤患者缺损大小术前测值为(27.27±4.07)mm,术中测值为(31.42±4.41)mm,所选取封堵器型号大小为(32.42±5.53)mm,术前与术中测值之间,以及两者与选取封堵器型号大小之间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),而术中测值与封堵器型号的相关性较术前测值更高(r=0.921vs r=0.752)。结论术前及术中使用超声心动图对房间隔缺损合并房间隔瘤患者的缺损大小测量存在差异,术中测量房间隔缺损大小与封堵器型号大小的选取更为相符。
Objective To investigate the feasibility of using echocardiography to predict the size of atrial septal defect occluder in patients undergoing atrial septal defect with atrial septal defect. Methods A retrospective analysis of 62 cases of atrial septal defect complicated with atrial septal defect treated by occlusion in our hospital was retrospectively analyzed. The difference of atrial septal defect size between echocardiogram before and after operation was compared with that of atrial septal defect occluder Model size to compare the preoperative and intraoperative measurements and occluder model size correlation analysis. Results The 62 cases of atrial septal defect with atrial septal defect had a preoperative value of (27.27 ± 4.07) mm and a mean intraoperative measurement of (31.42 ± 4.41) mm. The size of the occluder selected was (32.42 ± 5.53) mm, there was significant difference between preoperative and intraoperative measurements, and between the two and occluder type (P <0.05), but the correlation between intraoperative measurements and occluder type was statistically significant Preoperative measurements were higher (r = 0.921 vs r = 0.752). Conclusions There are differences in the measurement of defect size between patients with atrial septal defect and atrial septal defect using echocardiography before and during surgery. The size of atrial septal defect measured by surgery is more consistent with the size of occluder.