{"title":"Use of the Heimlich valve for treating pneumothorax.","authors":"T Niemi, J Hannukainen, P Aarnio","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the use of a small caliber tube connected to Heimlich flutter valve with a conventional thoracic drainage system in the treatment of pneumothorax.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with simple pneumothorax during the years 1991-1995 in Satakunta Central Hospital were included in this study. Nineteen patients were treated with the Heimlich flutter valve and 57 patients were treated with the standard drainage tube connected to an underwater seal device. The data were collected from hospital records focusing on the duration of chest drainage, the number of chest roentgenograms and the length of hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the Heimlich valve group the mean drainage time was 2,2+/-0.9 days and in the standard thoracic drainage group 3.4+/-3.8 days (p <0.05) respectively. The mean length of hospitalization in the Heimlich valve group was 3.3+/-2.2 days and in the standard thoracic drainage group 5+/-4.9 days (p < 0.01). The number of chest roentgenograms in the Heimlich valve group was 3+/-1.1 and in the standard thoracic drainage group 4.6+/-2.7 (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We believe that the treatment with a small caliber tube and Heimlich valve is a safe and effective procedure. It also reduces the duration of chest drainage and the length of hospital stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":75495,"journal":{"name":"Annales chirurgiae et gynaecologiae","volume":"88 1","pages":"36-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annales chirurgiae et gynaecologiae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and aims: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the use of a small caliber tube connected to Heimlich flutter valve with a conventional thoracic drainage system in the treatment of pneumothorax.
Materials and methods: Patients with simple pneumothorax during the years 1991-1995 in Satakunta Central Hospital were included in this study. Nineteen patients were treated with the Heimlich flutter valve and 57 patients were treated with the standard drainage tube connected to an underwater seal device. The data were collected from hospital records focusing on the duration of chest drainage, the number of chest roentgenograms and the length of hospital stay.
Results: In the Heimlich valve group the mean drainage time was 2,2+/-0.9 days and in the standard thoracic drainage group 3.4+/-3.8 days (p <0.05) respectively. The mean length of hospitalization in the Heimlich valve group was 3.3+/-2.2 days and in the standard thoracic drainage group 5+/-4.9 days (p < 0.01). The number of chest roentgenograms in the Heimlich valve group was 3+/-1.1 and in the standard thoracic drainage group 4.6+/-2.7 (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: We believe that the treatment with a small caliber tube and Heimlich valve is a safe and effective procedure. It also reduces the duration of chest drainage and the length of hospital stay.
背景和目的:本回顾性研究的目的是比较使用小口径导管连接海姆利克扑动阀与传统胸腔引流系统治疗气胸的效果。材料与方法:选取1991-1995年在Satakunta中心医院就诊的单纯性气胸患者为研究对象。19例患者采用海姆利克颤振阀治疗,57例患者采用连接水下密封装置的标准引流管治疗。数据收集自医院记录,重点关注胸腔引流时间、胸片次数和住院时间。结果:海姆利克瓣膜组平均引流时间为2.2 +/-0.9 d,标准胸腔引流组平均引流时间为3.4+/-3.8 d (p)。结论:我们认为小口径导管加海姆利克瓣膜治疗是一种安全有效的治疗方法。它还减少了胸腔引流的时间和住院时间。