O'Meara Susan, Cullum Nicky, Nelson E Andrea, Dumville Jo C
Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11(11):CD000265. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000265.pub3.
Up to one percent of people in industrialised countries will suffer from a leg ulcer at some time. The majority of these leg ulcers are due to problems in the veins, resulting in an accumulation of blood in the legs. Leg ulcers arising from venous problems are called venous (or varicose or stasis) ulcers. The main treatment is the application of a firm compression garment (bandage or stocking) in order to aid venous return. There is a large number of compression garments available and it was unclear whether they are effective in treating venous ulcers and, if so, which method of compression is the most effective.
To undertake a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects on venous ulcer healing of compression bandages and stockings.Specific questions addressed by the review are:1. Does the application of compression bandages or stockings aid venous ulcer healing? 2. Which compression bandage or stocking system is the most effective?
For this second update we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (31 May 2012); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 5, 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to May Week 4 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations 30 May 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 21); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 30 May 2012). No date or language restrictions were applied.
RCTs recruiting people with venous leg ulceration that evaluated any type of compression bandage system or compression stockings were eligible for inclusion. Eligible comparators included no compression (e.g. primary dressing alone, non-compressive bandage) or an alternative type of compression. RCTs had to report an objective measure of ulcer healing in order to be included (primary outcome for the review). SECONDARY OUTCOMES of the review included ulcer recurrence, costs, quality of life, pain, adverse events and withdrawals. There was no restriction on date, language or publication status of RCTs.
Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction table. Data extraction was performed by one review author and verified independently by a second review author.
Forty-eight RCTs reporting 59 comparisons were included (4321 participants in total). Most RCTs were small, and most were at unclear or high risk of bias. Duration of follow-up varied across RCTs. Risk ratio (RR) and other estimates are shown below where RCTs were pooled; otherwise findings refer to a single RCT.There was evidence from eight RCTs (unpooled) that healing outcomes (including time to healing) are better when patients receive compression compared with no compression.Single-component compression bandage systems are less effective than multi-component compression for complete healing at six months (one large RCT).A two-component system containing an elastic bandage healed more ulcers at one year than one without an elastic component (one small RCT).Three-component systems containing an elastic component healed more ulcers than those without elastic at three to four months (two RCTs pooled), RR 1.83 (95% CI 1.26 to 2.67), but another RCT showed no difference between groups at six months.An individual patient data meta-analysis of five RCTs suggested significantly faster healing with the four-layer bandage (4LB) than the short stretch bandage (SSB): median days to healing estimated at 90 and 99 respectively; hazard ratio 1.31 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.58).High-compression stockings are associated with better healing outcomes than SSB at two to four months: RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.26 to 2.10), estimate from four pooled RCTs.One RCT suggested better healing outcomes at 16 months with the addition of a tubular device plus single elastic bandage to a base system of gauze and crepe bandages when compared with two added elastic bandages. Another RCT had three arms; when one or two elastic bandages were added to a base three-component system that included an outer tubular layer, healing outcomes were better at six months for the two groups receiving elastic bandages.There is currently no evidence of a statistically significant difference for the following comparisons:⋅alternative single-component compression bandages (two RCTs, unpooled);⋅two-component bandages compared with the 4LB at three months (three RCTs pooled);⋅alternative versions of the 4LB for complete healing at times up to and including six months (three RCTs, unpooled);⋅4LB compared with paste bandage for complete healing at three months (two RCTs, pooled), six months or one year (one RCT for each time point);⋅adjustable compression boots compared with paste bandages for the outcome of change in ulcer area at three months (one small RCT);⋅adjustable compression boots compared with the 4LB with respect to complete healing at three months (one small RCT);⋅single-layer compression stocking compared with paste bandages for outcome of complete healing at four months (one small RCT) and 18 months (another small RCT);⋅low compression stocking compared with SSB for complete healing at three and six months (one small RCT);⋅compression stockings compared with a two-component bandage system and the 4LB for the outcome of complete healing at three months (one small, three-armed RCT); and,⋅tubular compression compared with SSB (one small RCT) for complete healing at three months.
4LB was more cost-effective than SSB. It was not possible to draw firm conclusions regarding other secondary outcomes including recurrence, adverse events and health-related quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compression increases ulcer healing rates compared with no compression. Multi-component systems are more effective than single-component systems. Multi-component systems containing an elastic bandage appear to be more effective than those composed mainly of inelastic constituents. Two-component bandage systems appear to perform as well as the 4LB. Patients receiving the 4LB heal faster than those allocated the SSB. More patients heal on high-compression stocking systems than with the SSB. Further data are required before the difference between high-compression stockings and the 4LB can be established.
在工业化国家,高达1%的人在某个时候会患上腿部溃疡。这些腿部溃疡大多是由静脉问题引起的,导致腿部血液积聚。由静脉问题引起的腿部溃疡称为静脉性(或静脉曲张性或淤积性)溃疡。主要治疗方法是使用紧实的加压衣物(绷带或长袜)以帮助静脉回流。市面上有大量的加压衣物,目前尚不清楚它们对治疗静脉溃疡是否有效,如果有效,哪种加压方法最有效。
对所有评估加压绷带和长袜对静脉溃疡愈合效果的随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统评价。该评价所涉及的具体问题如下:1. 使用加压绷带或长袜是否有助于静脉溃疡愈合?2. 哪种加压绷带或长袜系统最有效?
在本次第二次更新中,我们检索了以下数据库:Cochrane伤口小组专业注册库(2012年5月31日);Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2012年第5期);Ovid MEDLINE(1950年至2012年第4周);Ovid MEDLINE(在研及其他未索引引文,2012年5月30日);Ovid EMBASE(1980年至2012年第21周);以及EBSCO CINAHL(1982年至2012年5月30日)。未设置日期或语言限制。
招募患有下肢静脉溃疡患者并评估任何类型加压绷带系统或加压长袜的随机对照试验均符合纳入标准。符合条件的对照包括不加压(如仅使用初级敷料、非加压绷带)或其他类型的加压。随机对照试验必须报告溃疡愈合的客观测量指标才能纳入(本评价的主要结局)。本评价的次要结局包括溃疡复发、成本、生活质量、疼痛、不良事件和退出情况。对随机对照试验的日期、语言或发表状态没有限制。
使用数据提取表提取并总结符合条件的研究的详细信息。数据提取由一位评价作者进行,另一位评价作者独立进行核实。
纳入了48项报告59项比较的随机对照试验(共4321名参与者)。大多数随机对照试验规模较小,且大多数存在不清楚或高偏倚风险。各随机对照试验随访时间各不相同。当对随机对照试验进行合并时,风险比(RR)及其他估计值如下所示;否则研究结果指单个随机对照试验。八项随机对照试验(未合并)的证据表明,与不加压相比,患者接受加压时愈合结局(包括愈合时间)更好。在六个月时,单一组分加压绷带系统对于完全愈合的效果不如多组分加压(一项大型随机对照试验)。含有弹性绷带的双组分系统在一年时比不含弹性成分的系统愈合更多溃疡(一项小型随机对照试验)。含有弹性成分的三组分系统在三至四个月时比不含弹性成分的系统愈合更多溃疡(两项随机对照试验合并),RR为1.83(95%CI 1.26至2.67),但另一项随机对照试验显示六个月时两组之间无差异。对五项随机对照试验的个体患者数据进行的荟萃分析表明,四层绷带(4LB)比短拉伸绷带(SSB)愈合明显更快:估计愈合的中位天数分别为90天和99天;风险比为1.31(95%CI 1.09至1.58)。在两至四个月时,高压力长袜与比短拉伸绷带更好的愈合结局相关:RR为1.62(95%CI 1.26至2.10),来自四项合并的随机对照试验的估计值。一项随机对照试验表明,与添加两条弹性绷带相比,在纱布和绉布绷带的基础系统上添加管状装置加单条弹性绷带在16个月时愈合结局更好。另一项随机对照试验有三个组;当在包含外层管状层的基础三组分系统上添加一条或两条弹性绷带时,接受弹性绷带的两组在六个月时愈合结局更好。目前尚无证据表明以下比较存在统计学显著差异:
替代单一组分加压绷带(两项随机对照试验,未合并);
双组分绷带与三个月时的四层绷带相比(三项随机对照试验合并);
直至并包括六个月时用于完全愈合的不同版本四层绷带(三项随机对照试验,未合并);
三个月时四层绷带与糊剂绷带用于完全愈合的比较(两项随机对照试验合并),六个月或一年时(每个时间点一项随机对照试验);
三个月时可调式加压靴与糊剂绷带相比溃疡面积变化的结局(一项小型随机对照试验);
三个月时可调式加压靴与四层绷带相比完全愈合的结局(一项小型随机对照试验);
四个月时单层加压长袜与糊剂绷带相比完全愈合的结局(一项小型随机对照试验)以及18个月时(另一项小型随机对照试验);
三个月和六个月时低压力长袜与短拉伸绷带相比完全愈合的结局(一项小型随机对照试验);
三个月时加压长袜与双组分绷带系统和四层绷带相比完全愈合的结局(一项小型、三组的随机对照试验);以及,
三个月时管状加压与短拉伸绷带相比(一项小型随机对照试验)完全愈合的结局。
四层绷带比短拉伸绷带更具成本效益。对于包括复发、不良事件和健康相关生活质量在内的其他次要结果,无法得出确切结论。
与不加压相比,加压可提高溃疡愈合率。多组分系统比单一组分系统更有效。含有弹性绷带的多组分系统似乎比主要由非弹性成分组成的系统更有效。双组分绷带系统似乎与四层绷带效果相当。接受四层绷带的患者比分配到短拉伸绷带的患者愈合更快。在高压力长袜系统上愈合的患者比使用短拉伸绷带的患者更多。在确定高压力长袜与四层绷带之间的差异之前,还需要更多数据。