Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, MA 01655, USA.
Ann Emerg Med. 2011 May;57(5):483-91.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.11.021. Epub 2011 Jan 15.
The incidence of skin and soft tissue infections has increased dramatically during the last decade, in part because of increased prevalence of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA). Incision and drainage is considered the primary intervention; however, some clinicians prefer ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration because it represents a less invasive alternative. Our hypothesis is that ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration is equivalent to incision and drainage in treating simple skin and soft tissue abscesses.
This study was a nonblinded randomized controlled trial. Patients with uncomplicated superficial abscesses were randomized to incision and drainage with packing or ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration. Purulence obtained from the abscess was cultured to identify the causative organism. Bedside ultrasonography was performed pre- and postintervention to confirm the presence or absence of an abscess cavity. Patients were followed up at 48 hours (in person by a clinician) and on day 7 (telephone follow-up by research staff). The primary outcome was a combination of sonographic resolution and clinical resolution of the signs and symptoms of ongoing infection at day 7. The signs and symptoms of ongoing infection include increasing pain, erythema, and the presence of pus. Resolution was assessed with both sonographic resolution (day 0 and day 2) and improvement of clinical symptoms (day 2) and resolution of clinical symptoms (day 7) without further intervention.
A total of 101 patients were enrolled, 54 incision and drainage and 47 ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration patients. At initial presentation, 60% (95% confidence interval [CI] 45% to 70%) of needle aspirations yielded little or no purulence, despite sonographic visualization of an abscess cavity and sonographic guidance during the procedure. The overall success of ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration was 26% (95% CI 18% to 44%) compared with 80% (95% CI 66% to 89%) success in patients randomized to incision and drainage. The difference between groups was 54% (95% CI 35% to 69%). Overall success of both incision and drainage and ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration was lower in patients with CA-MRSA. Patients with CA-MRSA (n=33) were less likely to receive successful drainage with needle aspiration (8% versus 55%) or incision and drainage (61% versus 89%). The difference for needle aspiration and incision and drainage was 47% (95% CI 15% to 57%) and 28% (95% CI 4% to 45%), respectively.
Ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration is insufficient therapy for skin abscesses. The presence of CA-MRSA decreases the success of both incision and drainage and ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration.
在过去十年中,皮肤和软组织感染的发病率显著增加,部分原因是社区获得性耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(CA-MRSA)的流行。切开引流被认为是主要的干预措施;然而,一些临床医生更喜欢超声引导下的针吸,因为它是一种侵入性较小的替代方法。我们的假设是,超声引导下的针吸在治疗单纯皮肤和软组织脓肿方面与切开引流等效。
本研究为非盲随机对照试验。将患有单纯性浅表脓肿的患者随机分为切开引流加填塞组或超声引导下针吸组。从脓肿中提取的脓液进行培养以鉴定病原体。在干预前后进行床边超声检查以确认是否存在脓肿腔。患者在第 48 小时(由临床医生亲自)和第 7 天(由研究人员通过电话随访)进行随访。主要结局是第 7 天时超声和临床检查均显示脓肿和感染症状得到缓解。正在进行的感染的临床症状包括疼痛、红斑和脓液增加。通过超声检查(第 0 天和第 2 天)和临床症状的改善(第 2 天)以及在没有进一步干预的情况下临床症状的缓解(第 7 天)来评估缓解情况。
共有 101 名患者入组,其中 54 名接受切开引流,47 名接受超声引导下针吸。在初次就诊时,尽管在手术过程中进行了超声检查以可视化脓肿腔并进行了超声引导,但 60%(95%置信区间[CI] 45%至 70%)的针吸术仅产生少量或无脓液。超声引导下针吸的总体成功率为 26%(95%CI 18%至 44%),而随机接受切开引流的患者成功率为 80%(95%CI 66%至 89%)。两组之间的差异为 54%(95%CI 35%至 69%)。CA-MRSA 患者的切开引流和超声引导下针吸的总体成功率均较低。CA-MRSA 患者(n=33)接受成功引流的可能性较低,包括针吸(8%对 55%)或切开引流(61%对 89%)。针吸和切开引流的差异分别为 47%(95%CI 15%至 57%)和 28%(95%CI 4%至 45%)。
超声引导下针吸术不适用于治疗皮肤脓肿。CA-MRSA 的存在降低了切开引流和超声引导下针吸的成功率。