결과 향상 및 치료 간소화 - 임상적으로 증명되었습니다

토파즈+ 디지털 흉부 배액 및 모니터링 시스템

혁신적인 흉부 배액 경로 알아보기

폐 수술 후 공통 합병증

토파즈+는 흉부 배액 치료를 새로운 수준으로 끌어올립니다

아날로그 시스템과는 달리, 이 시스템은 환자의 흉부에 가해지는 압력을 확실하게 조절하고 중요한 치료 수치들을 디지털로(그리고 조용하게) 모니터링합니다. Medela의 흉부 배액 테라피가 치료 결과를 개선하고 치료 과정을 간소화한다는 점이 임상 데이터를 통해 증명되었습니다.

  • 토파즈+는 흉관 삽입 기간과 입원기간을 단축시켜줍니다.
  • 흉부 배액 장치를 사용하는 환자들의 안전을 개선합니다.
  • 공기 누출과 체액 손실을 지속적이고 객관적으로 모니터링하여 더 나은 임상 결정을 내릴 수 있도록 도와줍니다.
  • 환자의 활동성을 높여줍니다.
  • 의료진들은 토파즈+가 기존 흉부 배액 시스템에 비해 더 편리하고 사용하기 쉽다고 말합니다.
  • 안전한 흉부 배액 관리에 대해 더 알아보시려면 저희 FAQ 를 방문하십시오.

관심있으십니까? 계속 읽어서 토파즈+의 장점을 더 알아보세요

토파즈+가 여러분을 위해 할 수 있는 일 알아보기

참고 자료

1 Danitsch D. Benefits of Digital Thoracic Drainage Systems. Nurs times 2012;108(11):16–7.

2 Manzanet G, Vela A, Corell R, et al. A Hydrodynamic Study of Pleural Drainage Systems: Some Practical Consequences. Chest 2005;127(6):2211–21.

3 Aguayo E, Cameron R, Dobaria V et al. Assessment of differential pressures in chest drainage systems: Is what you see what you get? J Surg Res 2018;232: 464–9.

4 Refai M, Brunelli A, Varela G, et al. The Values of Intrapleural Pressure Before the Removal of Chest Tube in Non-Complicated Pulmonary Lobectomies. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012;41(4):831–3.

5 Brunelli A, Salati M, Pompili C, et al. Regulated Tailored Suction vs Regulated Seal A Prospective Randomized Trial on Air Leak Duration. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2013;43(5):899–904.

6 Hashmi U, Nadeem M, Aleem A, et al. Dysfunctional Closed Chest Drainage – Common Causative Factors and Recommendations for Prevention. Cureus 2018;10(3):e2295.

7 Rathinam S, Bradley A, Cantlin T, et al. Thopaz Portable suction Systems in Thoracic Surgery: An end user assessment and feedback in a tertiary unit. J Cardiothorac Surg 2011;6:59.

8 McGuire AL, Petrcich W, Maziak DE, et al. Digital versus analogue pleural drainage phase 1: prospective evaluation of interobserver reliability in the assessment of pulmonary air leaks. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2015;21(4):403–7.

9 Varela G, Jiménez MF, Novoa NM, et al. Postoperative chest tube management: measuring air leak using an electronic device decreases variability in the clinical practice. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009;35(1):28–31.

10 Cerfolio RJ, Varela G, Brunelli A. Digital and Smart Chest Drainage Systems to Monitor Air Leaks: The Birth of a New Era? Thorac Surg Clin 2010;20(3):413–20.

11 Liberman M, Muzikansky A, Wright CD, et al. Incidence and Risk Factors of Persistent Air Leak After Major Pulmonary Resection and Use of Chemical Pleurodesis. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;89(3):891–8.

12 Brunelli A, Monteverde M, Borri A, et al. Predictors of Prolonged Air Leak After Pulmonary Lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;77(4):1205–10.

13 Takamochi K, Imashimizu K, Fukui M, et al. Utility of Objective Chest Tube Management After Pulmonary Resection Using a Digital Drainage System. Ann Thorac Surg 2017; 104:275-83.

14 Batchelor TJP, Rasburn NJ, Abdelnour-Berchtold E, et al. Guidelines for Enhanced Recovery After Lung Surgery: Recommendations of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2018;55(1):91–115.

15 Day D. Keeping Patients Safe During Intrahospital Transport. Crit Care Nurs 2010;30(4):18–32.

16 Al-Tarshihi MI, Khamash FA, Ellatif A. Thoracostomy tube complications and pitfalls: An experience at a tertiary level military hospital. Rawal Med J 2008;33(2).

17 Zhou  J, Lyu M, Chen N, et al. Digital chest drainage is better than traditional chest drainage following pulmonary surgery: a meta-analysis. E J Cardiothorac Surg 2018;54(4):635–43.

18 Hsu T, Ryherd E, Waye KP, et al. Noise Pollution in Hospitals: Impact on Patients. Journal of Clinical Outcome Management 2012;19(7):301–9.

19 Kam PC, Kam AC, Thompson JF. Noise Pollution in the Anaesthetic and Intensive Care Environment. Anaesthesia 1994;49(11):982–6.

20 Sihoe A, Fang V, Liu L, et al. 2019.Objective and patient-reported outcomes after lung resection surgery are improved by digital chest drainage systems compared to traditional water seal systems: Results from a prospective multicenter database in China. Poster presented at ESTS 2019, Dublin.

21 Hayes LJ, O’Brien-Pallas L, Duffield C, et al. Nurse Turnover: A Literature Review – An Update. Int J Nurs Stud 2012;49(7):887–905.

22 Kalisch B, Lee H, Rochman M. Nursing Staff Teamwork and Job Satisfaction. J Nurs Manag 2010;18(8):938–47.

23 Mier JM, Molins L, Fibla JJ. The benefits of digital air leak assessment after pulmonary resection: prospective and comparative study. Cir Esp 2010;87(6):385–9.

24 National Institute for Health Excellence. Thopaz+ portable digital system for managing chest drains. Medical technologies guidance [MTG37]. 2018. Internet: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/MTG37 (downloaded on 21.01.2019).

25 Geroge RS, Papagiannopoulos K. Advances in chest drain management in thoracic disease. J Thorac Dis 2016;8(Suppl 1): S55–S64.

26 Pompili C, Brunelli A, Salati M, et al. Impact of the learning curve in the use of a novel electronic chest drainage system after pulmonary lobectomy: a case-matched analysis on the duration of chest tube usage. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2011;13(5):490–3.

27 eComment. Air Leak: The Importance of Being Consistent. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2015;21(4):408.

28 Pompili C, Detterbeck F, Papagiannopoulos K, et al. Multicenter International Randomized Comparison of Objective and Subjective Outcomes Between Electronic and Traditional Chest Drainage Systems. Ann Thorac Surg 2014;98(2):490–7.

29  Evans JM, Ray A, Dale M, et al. Thopaz+ portable digital system for managing chest drains: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2019;17(3):285–94.