Suppr超能文献

机械化学消融作为静脉溃疡愈合的替代方法与热消融相比。

Mechanochemical ablation as an alternative to venous ulcer healing compared with thermal ablation.

机构信息

Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.

Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019 Sep;7(5):699-705. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2019.05.005.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and thermal ablation (radiofrequency ablation and endovenous laser therapy) for venous ulcer healing in patients with clinical class 6 chronic venous insufficiency.

METHODS

Electronic medical records were reviewed of patients with venous ulcers who underwent truncal or perforator ablation between February 2012 and November 2015. These records contained history of venous disease and ulcer history, procedures, complications, follow-up, method of wound care, and current status of the ulcer. The patients were grouped according to the method of ablation for comparison.

RESULTS

In 66 patients, 82 venous segments were treated, 29 with thermal methods and 53 with MOCA; 16% of patients had prior venous intervention. Before ablation, three patients in the thermal group had a history of deep venous thrombosis compared with seven in the MOCA group. On average, patients treated with MOCA were older (thermal ablation, 57.2 years; MOCA, 67.9 years; P = .0003). Ulcer duration before intervention ranged from 9.2 months for thermal ablation to 11.2 months for MOCA (P = NS). In total, 74% of patients treated with MOCA healed their ulcers compared with 35% of those treated with thermal ablation (P = .01). A healed ulcer was defined as elimination of ulcer depth and superficial skin coverage. The mean time to heal was 4.4 months in the thermal ablation group compared with 2.3 months with MOCA (P = .01). The mean length of follow-up was 12.8 months after thermal ablation and 7.9 months after MOCA (P = .02). Both age (P = .03) and treatment modality (P = .03) independently had an impact on ulcer healing on multiple logistic regression analysis. All but two patients were treated with an Unna boot after venous ablation. Complications included readmission of two patients with nonaccess-related infections, one nonocclusive deep venous thrombosis, and one late death unrelated to the procedure second to pneumonia in the setting of advanced colon cancer. There were three recurrent ulcers at 1 week, 2 months, and 7 months after MOCA that rehealed with Unna boot therapy and continued compression.

CONCLUSIONS

MOCA is safe and effective in treating chronic venous ulcers and appears to provide comparable results to methods that rely on thermal ablation. Younger age and use of MOCA favored wound healing. MOCA was an independent predictor of ulcer healing. Randomized studies are necessary to further support our findings.

摘要

目的

我们旨在比较机械化学消融(MOCA)和热消融(射频消融和静脉内激光治疗)在临床 6 级慢性静脉功能不全患者中的静脉溃疡愈合效果。

方法

回顾了 2012 年 2 月至 2015 年 11 月期间接受主干或穿孔消融术的静脉溃疡患者的电子病历。这些记录包含静脉疾病和溃疡史、手术、并发症、随访、伤口护理方法以及溃疡当前状况。根据消融方法对患者进行分组比较。

结果

在 66 名患者中,82 个静脉段接受了治疗,其中 29 个采用了热方法,53 个采用了 MOCA;16%的患者有过静脉介入治疗史。在消融前,与 MOCA 组的 7 人相比,热疗组中有 3 人有深静脉血栓形成史。平均而言,接受 MOCA 治疗的患者年龄较大(热消融组为 57.2 岁;MOCA 组为 67.9 岁;P=0.0003)。干预前溃疡持续时间从热消融组的 9.2 个月到 MOCA 组的 11.2 个月不等(P=NS)。总的来说,接受 MOCA 治疗的患者中 74%的溃疡愈合,而接受热消融治疗的患者中只有 35%的溃疡愈合(P=0.01)。愈合的溃疡定义为消除溃疡深度和浅层皮肤覆盖。在热消融组中,平均愈合时间为 4.4 个月,而 MOCA 组为 2.3 个月(P=0.01)。热消融后平均随访时间为 12.8 个月,MOCA 后为 7.9 个月(P=0.02)。多变量逻辑回归分析显示,年龄(P=0.03)和治疗方式(P=0.03)均独立影响溃疡愈合。除了两名患者因非接触性感染、1 例非闭塞性深静脉血栓形成和 1 例晚期死亡而再次入院外,所有患者在静脉消融后均接受了 Unna 靴治疗。并发症包括两名非接触性感染患者、1 例非闭塞性深静脉血栓形成和 1 例晚期死亡,与晚期结肠癌并发肺炎无关。MOCA 治疗后 1 周、2 个月和 7 个月有 3 例复发性溃疡,采用 Unna 靴治疗和持续加压后愈合。

结论

MOCA 治疗慢性静脉溃疡是安全有效的,其效果似乎与依赖热消融的方法相当。年轻的年龄和使用 MOCA 有利于伤口愈合。MOCA 是溃疡愈合的独立预测因子。需要随机研究进一步支持我们的发现。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验