Wound Healing Research Unit, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Wound Repair Regen. 2014 Jan-Feb;22(1):43-51. doi: 10.1111/wrr.12127. Epub 2013 Dec 2.
It has been known for centuries that the application of larvae is useful to heal certain wounds by facilitating debridement of necrotic tissue,(1) yet the efficacy of larval therapy continues to be debatable. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of a larval therapy dressing (BioFOAM) with a standard debridement technique (Purilon gel; hydrogel) in terms of time to debridement of venous (VLU) or mixed arterial/venous (MLU) leg ulcers. Data analyses were conducted on 88 subjects. Sixty-four subjects completed the full study. Of these, 31 of the 32 (96.9%) patients who completed treatment in the larvae arm debrided fully, compared with 11 of the 32 (34.4%) patients who completed the hydrogel arm. In addition, 42 (48%) ulcers fully debrided within the 21-day intervention phase, 31 (67.4%) from the larvae arm (n = 46), and 11 (26.2%) from the hydrogel arm (n = 42), which was statistically significant (p = 0.001) in support of larvae. A statistically significant difference was also observed between treatment arms with regard to numbers of dressing changes during the intervention phase of the study (p < 0.001) in that subjects in the larvae arm required significantly fewer dressing changes(mean = 2.83) than those in the hydrogel arm (mean = 5.40). There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical condition of the wound bed and surrounding skin by intervention. Subjects in the larvae arm experienced more ulcer-related pain or discomfort than subjects in the hydrogel arm (p < 0.001). This study provided good evidence to show that larval therapy, in the form of a BioFOAM dressing, debrided VLU and MLU considerably more quickly than a hydrogel, although the possibility of resloughing should be closely monitored.
几个世纪以来,人们已经知道,应用幼虫有助于清除坏死组织,从而促进某些伤口的愈合。(1)然而,幼虫疗法的疗效仍然存在争议。本研究比较了一种幼虫治疗敷料(BioFOAM)与标准清创技术(Purilon 凝胶;水凝胶)在治疗静脉(VLU)或混合动脉/静脉(MLU)腿部溃疡时的清创时间。对 88 名受试者进行了数据分析。64 名受试者完成了全部研究。其中,在幼虫组完成治疗的 32 名患者中有 31 名(96.9%)完全清创,而在水凝胶组完成治疗的 32 名患者中有 11 名(34.4%)。此外,在 21 天干预期内,42 个(48%)溃疡完全清创,其中 31 个(67.4%)来自幼虫组(n=46),11 个(26.2%)来自水凝胶组(n=42),这在统计学上是显著的(p=0.001),支持幼虫。在研究的干预阶段,治疗组之间在更换敷料的次数方面也观察到了统计学上的显著差异(p<0.001),幼虫组的受试者(平均=2.83)比水凝胶组(平均=5.40)的受试者需要更换敷料的次数明显减少。干预后,伤口床和周围皮肤的临床状况没有统计学上的显著差异。幼虫组的受试者比水凝胶组的受试者经历了更多的与溃疡相关的疼痛或不适(p<0.001)。本研究提供了充分的证据表明,以 BioFOAM 敷料形式的幼虫治疗在清除 VLU 和 MLU 方面比水凝胶快得多,尽管应密切监测再脱皮的可能性。