Suppr超能文献

瑞士髌前和鹰嘴滑囊炎当前治疗方案的评估。

Evaluation of current treatment regimens for prepatellar and olecranon bursitis in Switzerland.

作者信息

Baumbach S F, Wyen H, Perez C, Kanz K-G, Uçkay I

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Innenstadt, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Nussbaumstrasse 20, 80336, Munich, Germany.

Department for Surgery, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2013 Feb;39(1):65-72. doi: 10.1007/s00068-012-0236-4. Epub 2012 Nov 8.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Bursitis is a common entity. However, evidence for the best treatment procedures is lacking, with management concepts varying internationally. We evaluated current treatment regimens for septic (SB) and nonseptic (NSB) prepatellar (PB) and (OB) olecranon bursitis in Switzerland and compared them to the published literature.

METHODS

A voluntary 23-item online survey was distributed amongst all registered Swiss infectiologists and orthopedic surgeons in December 2011. The literature comparison was based on a systematic literature review.

RESULTS

Overall response rate was 14 % (n = 117); 11 % (n = 92) were included in the final analysis. The overwhelming majority (91 %) of the respondents differentiated between SB and NSB, with determination predominantly based on clinical presentation (83 %), blood chemistry (75 %), and bursal aspirate (66 %). NSB was predominantly treated conservatively via immobilization (78 %) and anti-inflammatory medication (73 %). For SB, 85 % indicated surgical intervention, with 73 % prescribing concomitant antibiotics. Regarding antibiotic choice, 90 % used an aminopenicillin or its derivatives for a mean of 11 ± 5 days. The literature review revealed 66 relevant publications with an overall level of evidence of 2b, arguing for a conservative treatment approach in cases of SB or NSB.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic regimens for OB/PB differed considerably within Switzerland. Surgical intervention and antibiotic treatment was the most common therapy for SB, whereas a conservative approach predominated for NSB, which contrasts with the international literature. Clearly, prospective multicenter and multidisciplinary studies are needed to identify an optimal and cost-saving approach to the treatment of these common clinical entities.

摘要

目的

滑囊炎是一种常见病症。然而,目前缺乏关于最佳治疗方法的证据,且国际上的治疗理念各不相同。我们评估了瑞士当前针对感染性(SB)和非感染性(NSB)髌前(PB)及鹰嘴(OB)滑囊炎的治疗方案,并将其与已发表的文献进行比较。

方法

2011年12月,我们向瑞士所有注册的传染病专家和骨科医生发放了一份包含23个项目的自愿在线调查问卷。文献比较基于系统的文献综述。

结果

总体回复率为14%(n = 117);最终分析纳入了11%(n = 92)的回复。绝大多数(91%)受访者对SB和NSB进行了区分,主要依据临床表现(83%)、血液化学检查(75%)和滑囊穿刺液检查(66%)来判断。NSB主要通过固定(78%)和抗炎药物治疗(73%)进行保守治疗。对于SB,85%的受访者表示采用手术干预,73%的受访者同时开具抗生素。在抗生素选择方面,90%的受访者使用氨基青霉素或其衍生物,平均使用时间为11±5天。文献综述显示有66篇相关出版物,总体证据水平为2b,主张对SB或NSB病例采用保守治疗方法。

结论

瑞士国内针对OB/PB的治疗方案差异很大。手术干预和抗生素治疗是SB最常见的治疗方法,而NSB则以保守治疗为主,这与国际文献有所不同。显然,需要进行前瞻性的多中心和多学科研究,以确定治疗这些常见临床病症的最佳且节省成本的方法。

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