Suppr超能文献

一项关于使用手术胶带或缝线对浅表伤口裂开进行二期缝合的随机试验。

A randomized trial of secondary closure of superficial wound dehiscence by surgical tape or suture.

作者信息

Zaid Tarrik M, Herring Whitney P, Meeks G Rodney

机构信息

From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS.

出版信息

Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010 Jul;16(4):246-8. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0b013e3181ec21d3.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

: Evaluate secondary closure of superficial wound dehiscence with suture versus tape.

METHODS

: Postoperative obstetrics and gynecologic patients with superficial wound dehiscence were eligible. Wounds were opened for their entire length, debrided, and irrigated. They were packed with moistened gauze until the granulation tissue covered the wound. Randomization occurred when the patient selected a sealed envelope containing a closure technique. Demographic data and wound characteristics were recorded. Pain was determined by using a 100-mm visual analogue scale, which the patient marked immediately after the procedure. Wound closure was measured in minutes. Healing time was measured in days from wound closure to complete wound epithelialization and no need for further wound care. Reopening a closed wound defined treatment failure. Time for complete healing was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

: Fifteen patients were randomized to each arm over a 20-month period. Demographics and wound characteristics were similar between groups. Pain scores were significantly less in the tape group (21.4 ± 17.0 vs 60.7 ± 23.0 mm, P < 0.001) as was time for closure (12.3 ± 3.6 vs 31.0 ± 6.8 minutes, P < 0.001). Time for complete healing was significantly less in the suture group (23.0 ± 7.9 vs 16.1 ± 3.36 days, P < 0.001). One wound (7%) in each group was reopened.

CONCLUSIONS

: Suture closure seems to be the superior technique for secondary closure of wound dehiscence based on the primary outcome of time to complete healing for this study. Therefore, suture closure seems to be the best option for secondary closure of superficial wound dehiscence.However, both suture and surgical tape are effective treatments when historically compared with second intention.

摘要

目的

评估采用缝线与胶带对浅表伤口裂开进行二期缝合的效果。

方法

纳入术后出现浅表伤口裂开的妇产科患者。将伤口全长打开,清创并冲洗。用湿纱布填充伤口,直至肉芽组织覆盖伤口。当患者选择一个装有闭合技术的密封信封时进行随机分组。记录人口统计学数据和伤口特征。采用100毫米视觉模拟量表测定疼痛程度,患者在操作后立即进行标记。记录伤口闭合所需时间(以分钟计)。从伤口闭合至伤口完全上皮化且无需进一步伤口护理的天数为愈合时间。闭合伤口重新裂开定义为治疗失败。完全愈合时间为主要观察指标。

结果

在20个月期间,每组随机分配15例患者。两组的人口统计学和伤口特征相似。胶带组的疼痛评分显著更低(21.4±17.0 vs 60.7±23.0毫米,P<0.001),闭合时间也显著更短(12.3±3.6 vs 31.0±6.8分钟,P<0.001)。缝线组的完全愈合时间显著更短(23.0±7.9 vs 16.1±3.36天,P<0.001)。每组各有1个伤口(7%)重新裂开。

结论

基于本研究完全愈合时间这一主要观察指标,缝线闭合似乎是伤口裂开二期缝合的更优技术。因此,缝线闭合似乎是浅表伤口裂开二期缝合的最佳选择。然而,与二期愈合相比,缝线和手术胶带在治疗效果上均有效。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验