Objective To evaluate the effects of peripheral venous remaining needle sealing with heparin vs. saline in China. Methods A comprehensive, systematic bibliographic search of medical literature from databases of CNKI (1994 to December, 2009) and Wanfang (1990 to December, 2009) was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to catheter sealing with saline vs. heparin. The remaining time of venous needle, the incidence of phlebitis and the catheter blockage were compared, and the quality of RCTs was assessed and meta-analyses were conducted by RevMan 5.0 software. Results Nine RCTs involving 1 770 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) There was a significant difference between heparin sealing and saline sealing in catheter blockage (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.32 to 0.62, Plt;0.05). The heparin sealing was much better to prevent catheter blockage; b) There was no significant difference between saline sealing and heparin sealing in the incidence of phlebitis (OR=1.26, 95%CI 0.64 to 2.50, Pgt;0.05); and c) The average remaining time of venous catheter between saline sealing and heparin sealing had significant difference (WMD=0.24, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.43, Plt;0.05). Heparin sealing had better effect than saline sealing. Conclusion The meta-analyses of current medical literature in China show that heparin sealing can reduce the incidence of catheter blockage and prolong the remaining time of catheter, although there is no significant effect in the aspect of the incidence of phlebitis.
Objective To report the preliminary results of intraoperative saline-irrigated radiofrequency modified maze procedure for chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) in mitral valve diseases. Methods From May 2003 to April 2004 forty-one patients underwent intraoperative saline-irrigated modified maze procedure. The patients included 13 male and 28 female. Their age ranged from 27-65 years (46±10 years). The duration of AF varied from 5 months to 15 years (4.5±3.6 years).The left atrial diameter varied from 37-93 mm (54±11mm). There were mitral stenosis 20, mitral regurgitation 1 and mitral stenosis with regurgitation 20 cases. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was established as usual. Ablation lines were made with Cardioblate (Medtronic, 25-30 W, 180-240ml/h). Having finished right-sided maze procedure, the aorta was cross-clamped and cold crystalloid or blood cardioplegia were used for myocardial protection. Left atrial incision was performed through the interatrial groove. The ablation lines were created to encircle the orifices of the left and right pulmonary veins respectively. The ablation lines were also performed from the left encircling line to the posterior mitral valvular annulus and to the orifice of left atrial appendage respectively. A ablation line was used to connect left and right pulmonary veins circumferential line. Concomitant procedures were performed (there were double valve replacement 10 cases, mitral valve replacement 31 cases, tricuspid annuloplasty 6 cases, removing the left atrial thrombi 6 cases). Results CPB time varied from 71-160 min (105±24 min) and cross-clamping time varied from 32-106 min (62±20 min). The ablation time varied from 4-22 min (11±4 min). One patient died during hospitalization and the death was caused by acute mechanic valve obstruction. During follow-up at discharge and 3 months 35% patients (14/40) were free of AF and the others were not. But at 6 months 67% patients (10/15) were free of AF. Conclusion The intraoperative saline-irrigated radiofrequency modified maze procedure is comparatively simpler and its efficacy is satisfactory.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of intranasal lidocaine spray before nasogastric tube insertion. MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, WanFang Data, VIP, CBM and CNKI databases concerning randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the efficacy and safety of intranasal lidocaine spray before nasogastric tube insertion from their inception to January 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of included studies. Meta-analysis was then conducted using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsSix RCTs involving 384 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the lidocaine group and the saline group in pain and discomfort scores (MD=-25.35, 95%CI -30.37 to -24.33) and first successful insertion rate (RR=1.38, 95%CI 1.21 to 1.57). ConclusionIntranasal lidocaine spray before nasogastric tube insertion could reduce patient pain and discomforts related to the procedure, and improve the first successful insertion rate.