| Literature DB >> 36105248 |
Weihong Fu1, Qun Zhang2, Xuemei Sun1, Yan Gu3.
Abstract
This study was designed to investigate the application and therapeutic effect of antithrombotic elastic socks combined with air pressure in the prevention of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery. Sixty patients in cardiothoracic surgery of our hospital from January 2019 to December 2020 were randomly divided into a study group and control group. The control group was treated with routine treatment intervention. Based on routine treatment intervention, the study group was treated with antithrombotic elastic socks combined with pneumatic treatment intervention. The activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), thrombin time (TT), femoral venous blood flow velocity of both lower limbs, and the incidence of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LEDVT), postoperative lower extremity swelling, inflammatory factors, and satisfaction were measured. After intervention, APTT (31.74 ± 1.15 s) and TT (14.58 ± 0.24 s) in the study group were higher than those in the control group APTT (25.13 ± 1.14 s) and TT (12.14 ± 0.23 s) (P < 0.05). The left lower limb femoral vein blood flow velocity and the right lower limb femoral vein blood flow velocity in the study group were better than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative lower limb swelling and deep vein in the study group was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). Serum tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin-6 concentrations in the study group were lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The satisfaction rate of patients in the study group (93.33%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (70.00%) (P < 0.05). In conclusion, after cardiothoracic surgery, antithrombotic elastic socks combined with air pressure can significantly reduce the incidence of LEDVT by improving patients' coagulation function, reducing inflammatory reaction. It is worthy of popularization and application in relevant surgery.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36105248 PMCID: PMC9467765 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1338214
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Comparison of general data between the two groups.
| Groups |
| Age (years) | Gender ( | Height (cm) | Body weight (kg) | Operation time (min) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | ||||||
| Control group | 30 | 64.63 ± 5.44 | 18 | 12 | 162.86 ± 7.62 | 66.77 ± 11.53 | 194.52 ± 44.63 |
| Study group | 30 | 64.93 ± 5.68 | 15 | 15 | 462.66 ± 9.12 | 69.63 ± 10.40 | 176.71 ± 43.52 |
|
| >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.05 | ||
Comparison of coagulation function indexes between the two groups before and after intervention (s, x ± s).
| Groups |
| APTT | TT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | After intervention | Before intervention | After intervention | ||
| Control group | 30 | 20.83 ± 1.44 | 25.13 ± 1.14 | 11.08 ± 0.31 | 12.14 ± 0.23 |
| Study group | 30 | 20.80 ± 1.45 | 31.74 ± 1.15 | 11.12 ± 0.27 | 14.58 ± 0.24 |
|
| 0.085 | 20.105 | 0.441 | 32.062 | |
|
| >0.05 | <0.05 | >0.05 | <0.05 | |
Comparison of blood flow velocity of the femoral vein of both lower limbs between the two groups before and after intervention (cm/s, x ± s).
| Groups |
| Left lower limb (cm/s, | Right lower limb (cm/s, | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | After intervention | Before intervention | After intervention | ||
| Control group | 30 | 14.08 ± 3.31 | 16.19 ± 4.02 | 14.06 ± 3.20 | 16.13 ± 4.21 |
| Study group | 30 | 14.11 ± 3.21 | 19.50 ± 5.03 | 14.01 ± 3.01 | 19.20 ± 4.18 |
|
| 0.039 | 3.402 | 0.066 | 2.722 | |
|
| >0.05 | <0.05 | >0.05 | <0.05 | |
Comparison of postoperative lower limb swelling and deep venous thrombosis between the two groups (cases (%)).
| Groups |
| Postoperative lower limb swelling | Deep venous thrombosis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 30 | 8 (26.67) | 6 (20.00) |
| Study group | 30 | 1 (3.33) | 0 (0.00) |
|
| 6.40 | 6.67 | |
|
| <0.05 | <0.05 |
Comparison of serum inflammatory factors between the two groups (x ± s).
| Groups | TNF- | IL-6 (pg/mL) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | After intervention | Before intervention | After intervention | |
| Control group | 2.86 ± 0.30 | 1.59 ± 0.21 | 24.65 ± 2.13 | 15.29 ± 0.95 |
| Study group | 2.81 ± 0.24 | 1.04 ± 0.32 | 26.65 ± 2.21 | 9.34 ± 0.88 |
|
| 0.668 | 5.241 | 0.012 | 6.214 |
|
| >0.05 | <0.05 | >0.05 | <0.05 |
Comparison of patient satisfaction between the two groups (n (%)).
| Groups |
| Very satisfied | Satisfied | Dissatisfied | Satisfaction rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 30 | 8 (26.67) | 11 (36.67) | 11 (36.67) | 21 (70.00) |
| Study group | 30 | 16 (53.33) | 12 (40.00) | 2 (6.67) | 28 (93.33) |
|
| 5.269 | ||||
|
| <0.05 |