Suppr超能文献

在全身麻醉下使用外部空气冷却和不使用肿胀麻醉的情况下,对大隐静脉功能不全的腔内激光治疗的疗效进行比较研究。

A comparative study of the efficacy of endovenous laser treatment of the incompetent great saphenous under general anesthesia with external air cooling with and without tumescent anesthesia.

机构信息

Instituto Médico Vilafortuny, Fundación Antoni de Gimbernat, Cambrils, Spain.

出版信息

Dermatol Surg. 2013 Feb;39(2):255-62. doi: 10.1111/dsu.12063. Epub 2012 Dec 10.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This clinical study reports our experience with endovenous laser treatment (ELT) in which external air cooling is used without classic tumescent anesthesia.

METHODS

Two hundred thirty-two patients underwent ELT under general sedation. In group A (n = 192), ELT was performed with air cooling but without the concurrent use of tumescent anesthesia. In group B (n = 40), patients were treated using the traditional tumescent technique. The parameters were similar for both groups: 980-nm diode laser, power of 15 W, and pulse duration of 1 second. The laser fiber and catheter were manually withdrawn in 3-mm increments. Ultrasound was performed to reevaluate vein closure at the end of surgery and 2 and 8 weeks and 1 year after. During follow-up, complications such as burns, dyschromia, pain, and dysesthesia, as well as time used for surgery were recorded.

RESULTS

A 96% closure rate was obtained in groups A and B at 2 and 8 weeks. This rate remained stable 1 year after the ELT procedure. Except for a higher percentage of ecchymoses in group B (55%) than in group A (0%) (p < 0.001), no significant differences were observed for complications. With external air cooling, ELT took 17.5 minutes to perform for the whole leg, compared with 38.5 minutes when using tumescent anesthesia (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ELT surgery for the great saphenous vein can be safely performed using the air cooling method and is as efficacious as ELT done with tumescent anesthesia but takes significantly less time to perform.

摘要

背景

本临床研究报告了我们在静脉内激光治疗(ELT)中使用外部空气冷却而不使用经典肿胀麻醉的经验。

方法

232 例患者在全身镇静下接受 ELT。在 A 组(n=192)中,使用空气冷却进行 ELT,但不同时使用肿胀麻醉。在 B 组(n=40)中,患者使用传统肿胀技术进行治疗。两组的参数相似:980nm 二极管激光,功率 15W,脉冲持续时间 1 秒。激光光纤和导管以 3mm 的增量手动撤回。在手术结束时、术后 2 周和 8 周以及 1 年后进行超声检查以重新评估静脉闭合情况。在随访期间,记录了手术时间以及并发症,如烧伤、色素沉着异常、疼痛和感觉异常。

结果

A 组和 B 组在术后 2 周和 8 周时均获得 96%的闭合率。该比率在 ELT 手术后 1 年保持稳定。除 B 组(55%)比 A 组(0%)(p<0.001)瘀斑的百分比更高外,两组间并发症无显著差异。使用外部空气冷却,整个腿部进行 ELT 手术需要 17.5 分钟,而使用肿胀麻醉则需要 38.5 分钟(p<0.05)。

结论

使用空气冷却方法进行大隐静脉的 ELT 手术是安全的,与使用肿胀麻醉的 ELT 一样有效,但手术时间明显缩短。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验