Markl Peter, Prantl Lukas, Schreml Stephan, Babilas Philipp, Landthaler Michael, Schwarze Hardy
Department of Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Ann Plast Surg. 2010 Nov;65(5):490-6. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181d37624.
This prospective, randomized, single-blinded, clinical study aimed at evaluating 3 different synthetic wound dressings for treating split-thickness skin graft donor sites. Seventy-seven patients were randomly assigned to 3 study groups: Suprathel, Biatain-Ibu, Mepitel. Wounds were inspected daily until complete reepithelization. Ease of care, treatment costs, and scar development after a 6 months follow-up were evaluated. Suprathel showed significant (P ≤ 0.001) pain reduction after 24 hours but increasing pain scores on the 5th day of treatment. Biatain-Ibu showed significant pain relief immediately after application and during the entire treatment period (P < 0.05). Mepitel did not show any significant pain reduction. No differences were seen with regard to healing time, quality of reepithelization, and scar development. Biatain-Ibu had the lowest overall treatment costs (P ≤ 0.001). The investigated materials did not differ with regard to quality and acceleration of the healing process, but Biatain-Ibu seems to be the most appropriate dressing material in terms of cost-effectiveness.
这项前瞻性、随机、单盲临床研究旨在评估3种不同的合成伤口敷料用于治疗中厚皮片供皮区。77例患者被随机分为3个研究组：Suprathel组、Biatain-Ibu组、Mepitel组。每天检查伤口直至完全上皮化。评估了护理的便利性、治疗费用以及6个月随访后的瘢痕形成情况。Suprathel组在24小时后疼痛显著减轻（P≤0.001），但在治疗第5天疼痛评分增加。Biatain-Ibu组在应用后及整个治疗期间疼痛均显著缓解（P<0.05）。Mepitel组未显示出任何显著的疼痛减轻。在愈合时间、上皮化质量和瘢痕形成方面未见差异。Biatain-Ibu组的总体治疗费用最低（P≤0.001）。所研究的材料在愈合过程的质量和加速方面没有差异，但就成本效益而言，Biatain-Ibu似乎是最合适的敷料材料。
