文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

Early versus delayed dressing removal after primary closure of clean and clean-contaminated surgical wounds.

作者信息

Toon Clare D, Lusuku Charnelle, Ramamoorthy Rajarajan, Davidson Brian R, Gurusamy Kurinchi Selvan

机构信息

Public Health Research Unit, West Sussex County Council, The Grange, County Hall Campus, Tower Street, Chichester, West Sussex, UK, PO19 1QT.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 3;2015(9):CD010259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010259.pub3.


DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD010259.pub3
PMID:26331392
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7087443/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most surgical procedures involve a cut in the skin that allows the surgeon to gain access to the deeper tissues or organs. Most surgical wounds are closed fully at the end of the procedure (primary closure). The surgeon covers the closed surgical wound with either a dressing or adhesive tape. The dressing can act as a physical barrier to protect the wound until the continuity of the skin is restored (within about 48 hours) and to absorb exudate from the wound, keeping it dry and clean, and preventing bacterial contamination from the external environment. Some studies have found that the moist environment created by some dressings accelerates wound healing, although others believe that the moist environment can be a disadvantage, as excessive exudate can cause maceration (softening and deterioration) of the wound and the surrounding healthy tissue. The utility of dressing surgical wounds beyond 48 hours of surgery is, therefore, controversial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and risks of removing a dressing covering a closed surgical incision site within 48 hours permanently (early dressing removal) or beyond 48 hours of surgery permanently with interim dressing changes allowed (delayed dressing removal), on surgical site infection. SEARCH METHODS: In March 2015 we searched the following electronic databases: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched the references of included trials to identify further potentially-relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently identified studies for inclusion. We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) conducted with people of any age and sex, undergoing a surgical procedure, who had their wound closed and a dressing applied. We included only trials that compared early versus delayed dressing removal. We excluded trials that included people with contaminated or dirty wounds. We also excluded quasi-randomised studies, and other study designs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data on the characteristics of the trial participants, risk of bias in the trials and outcomes for each trial. We calculated risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes and mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. We used RevMan 5 software to perform these calculations. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials were identified for inclusion in this review. All the trials were at high risk of bias. Three trials provided information for this review. Overall, this review included 280 people undergoing planned surgery. Participants were randomised to early dressing removal (removal of the wound dressing within the 48 hours following surgery) (n = 140) or delayed dressing removal (continued dressing of the wound beyond 48 hours) (n = 140) in the three trials. There were no statistically significant differences between the early dressing removal group and delayed dressing removal group in the proportion of people who developed superficial surgical site infection within 30 days (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.28), superficial wound dehiscence within 30 days (RR 2.00; 95% CI 0.19 to 21.16) or serious adverse events within 30 days (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.28 to 2.51). No deep wound infection or deep wound dehiscence occurred in any of the participants in the trials that reported this outcome. None of the trials reported quality of life. The hospital stay was significantly shorter (MD -2.00 days; 95% CI -2.82 to -1.18) and the total cost of treatment significantly less (MD EUR -36.00; 95% CI -59.81 to -12.19) in the early dressing removal group than in the delayed dressing removal group in the only trial that reported these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The early removal of dressings from clean or clean contaminated surgical wounds appears to have no detrimental effect on outcomes. However, it should be noted that the point estimate supporting this statement is based on very low quality evidence from three small randomised controlled trials, and the confidence intervals around this estimate were wide. Early dressing removal may result in a significantly shorter hospital stay, and significantly reduced costs, than covering the surgical wound with wound dressings beyond the first 48 hours after surgery, according to very low quality evidence from one small randomised controlled trial. Further randomised controlled trials of low risk of bias are necessary to investigate whether dressings are necessary after 48 hours in different types of surgery and levels of contamination and investigate whether antibiotic therapy influences the outcome.

摘要

相似文献

[1]
Early versus delayed dressing removal after primary closure of clean and clean-contaminated surgical wounds.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-9-3

[2]
Early versus delayed dressing removal after primary closure of clean and clean-contaminated surgical wounds.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-9-5

[3]
Early versus delayed post-operative bathing or showering to prevent wound complications.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-7-23

[4]
Early versus delayed post-operative bathing or showering to prevent wound complications.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-10-12

[5]
Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-4-26

[6]
Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-12-20

[7]
Intracavity lavage and wound irrigation for prevention of surgical site infection.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-10-30

[8]
Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-6-14

[9]
Dressings and topical agents for the management of open wounds after surgical treatment for sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-5-20

[10]
Hydrogel dressings for venous leg ulcers.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-8-5

引用本文的文献

[1]
Consensus document on the management of wound closure in orthopaedic surgery.

EFORT Open Rev. 2025-2-3

[2]
Incidence and Risk Factors of Infection After Fracture Fixation: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

Orthop Surg. 2025-1

[3]
Main Operating Room Versus Field Sterility in Hand Surgery: A Review of the Evidence.

Plast Surg (Oakv). 2024-11

[4]
A network meta-analysis of the timing of wound dressing removal.

Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2025-4

[5]
Comparing Wound Healing and Infection Risk Between Early and Late Dressing Removal After Abdominal Hysterectomy.

Cureus. 2024-6-17

[6]
Impact of postoperative skin disinfection with chlorhexidine on bacterial colonisation following shoulder arthroplasty surgery: a controlled randomised study.

Infect Prev Pract. 2024-4-26

[7]
Open fractures: evidence-based best practices.

OTA Int. 2024-5-3

[8]
Fracture-Related Infection-Epidemiology, Etiology, Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment.

Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2024-1-12

[9]
Biodegradable piezoelectric skin-wound scaffold.

Biomaterials. 2023-10

[10]
A systematic review with meta-analysis on prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy versus standard dressing for obese women after caesarean section.

Nurs Open. 2023-9

本文引用的文献

[1]
Early vs. delayed removal of dressings covering surgical wounds.

Am J Nurs. 2014-8

[2]
A comparison of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate adhesives versus conventional suture materials for eyelid wound closure in rabbits.

Korean J Ophthalmol. 2011-4

[3]
Barrier dressings in surgical site infection prevention strategies.

Br J Nurs. 2010

[4]
Essential concepts of wound management.

Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2010-11

[5]
Staples versus sutures for closing leg wounds after vein graft harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010-5-12

[6]
Sutureless skin closure with isoamyl 2-cyanoacrylate in pediatric day-care surgery.

Pediatr Surg Int. 2009-12

[7]
Surgical site infections: how high are the costs?

J Hosp Infect. 2009-7

[8]
Assessment of risk of bias in randomized clinical trials in surgery.

Br J Surg. 2009-4

[9]
Occlusive vs gauze dressings for local wound care in surgical patients: a randomized clinical trial.

Arch Surg. 2008-10

[10]
[Randomized trial comparing dressing to no dressing of surgical wounds in a tropical setting].

J Chir (Paris). 2008

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索