Aghakhani Kamran, Heidari Mansoure, Tabatabaee Seyed Morteza, Abdolkarimi Leyla
Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Burns. 2015 Feb;41(1):172-6. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2014.06.008. Epub 2014 Jul 8.
Electrical injury is relatively uncommon but it is a devastating form of thermal injury. The aim of this study is to analyze specific aspects of electrical injuries, especially the effect of current pathways on morbidity and mortality.
This descriptive-analytical study was performed on patients with electrical burns who were admitted to the Shahid Motahary Burn Center from April 2010 to March 2012. Demographic and clinical data including gender, age, length of hospital stay, total body surface area (TBSA), grading of burn, electrical voltage, inlet electrical mark, outflow electrical mark, current pathway, surgical procedures, and place of electrical burn have been gathered from medical records. The site of inlet and outlet of current on the body is divided into six groups: Rt (right) upper limb, Lt (left) upper limb, Rt lower limb, Lt lower limb, head and neck, and trunk. According to these sites, the current pathway is defined to seven groups. Data were analyzed with SPSS software, version 20.
From 287 patients, 283 were men and 4 were women. The mean age was 30±12 years (range 1-71) and mean TBSA was 13.56±12.97% (range 1-100). There were 233 patients (81.2%) with passage of the electrical current through the body and 54 patients (18.8%) with flash burns. A total of 859 surgical procedures were performed on 232 patients. One hundred and eighteen amputations were performed in 83 patients. The most common inlet electrical marks were in Rt upper limb and the most common outlet electrical marks were in Lt lower limbs, and consequently, the most common pathway was upper limb to lower limb.
Electrical injuries are mainly occupation-related injuries and in this research majority of injuries occurred outdoor by high voltage cables in young men. Thus the government should consider a distinct strategy for this group. Also it is observed that there were no significant differences in mortality and complications such as amputation between different pathways.
电击伤相对少见，但却是一种极具破坏性的热损伤形式。本研究旨在分析电击伤的具体方面，尤其是电流通路对发病率和死亡率的影响。
本描述性分析研究针对2010年4月至2012年3月入住沙希德·莫塔哈里烧伤中心的电击伤患者进行。从病历中收集了人口统计学和临床数据，包括性别、年龄、住院时间、全身表面积（TBSA）、烧伤分级、电压、入口电击痕迹、出口电击痕迹、电流通路、手术操作以及电击伤部位。身体上电流入口和出口部位分为六组：右上肢、左上肢、右下肢、左下肢、头颈部和躯干。根据这些部位，电流通路定义为七组。数据采用SPSS 20.0软件进行分析。
287例患者中，283例为男性，4例为女性。平均年龄为30±12岁（范围1 - 71岁），平均TBSA为13.56±12.97%（范围1 - 100%）。233例患者（81.2%）电流通过身体，54例患者（18.8%）为闪燃烧伤。232例患者共进行了859次手术操作。83例患者进行了118次截肢手术。最常见的入口电击痕迹位于右上肢，最常见的出口电击痕迹位于左下肢，因此，最常见的通路是上肢到下肢。
电击伤主要是与职业相关的损伤，在本研究中，大多数损伤发生在户外，由高压电缆导致，受害者多为年轻男性。因此，政府应为该群体制定独特的策略。此外，观察到不同通路之间在死亡率和截肢等并发症方面无显著差异。
