Huang Z, Wang P, Pan Z Y, Dong L, Su J, Xu N W
Department of Plastic Surgery and Burns, Xuzhou Renci Hospital, Xuzhou 221004, China.
Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi. 2020 Sep 20;36(9):813-820. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20191225-00472.
To compare the effects and characteristic difference of negative pressure materials of polyvinyl alcohol and polyurethane in the treatment of full-thickness burn wounds after escharotomy. From January 2018 to December 2019, 60 patients with full-thickness burns who met the inclusion criteria and hospitalized in Xuzhou Renci Hospital were recruited in this prospective randomized controlled trial. According to the random number table, 60 cases were divided into polyvinyl alcohol group ( =30, 13 males and 17 females) and polyurethane group ( =30, 14 males and 16 females), aged (34±7) and (35±6) years respectively, with burn area of 4.20% (2.23%, 4.90%) total body surface area (TBSA) and 3.89% (2.18%, 4.76%)TBSA and escharectomy area of 2.70% (1.97%, 3.42%) TBSA and 2.87% (2.12%, 3.34%)TBSA, respectively. After patient's admission, debridement was immediately performed on the full-thickness burn wound, and the dressing was changed with iodophor once a day. Escharectomy was performed on post injury day 3. After thorough hemostasis and washing the wounds with normal saline, patients of the two groups chose corresponding foam materials and supporting facilities for continuous negative-pressure treatment for 1 week, with the negative pressure value setting at -19.9 kPa. Installation time of negative-pressure material was recorded. After a week of negative-pressure treatment, the maximum pulling force of removing foam material was recorded to evaluate the adhesional degree between foam materials and wounds. The amount of bleeding in the process of removing foam materials was recorded, hyperplasiaof granulation tissue was observed with hematoxylin eosin (HE) staining, and the expression of CD31 was detected by immunohistochemical staining and Western blotting to denote vascularization. The ratio of R1 to R0 of coefficient of restitution of foam material before and one week after negative-pressure treatment and drainage volume of wound exudate within a week of negative-pressure treatment were recorded to denote the drainage ability of foam material to wound exudate. One week after negative-pressure treatment, the bacterial colonization, residual foreign body, and eczema rate of skin edge were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed with chi-square test, independent-sample test, and Mann-Whitney test. (1) Installation time of negative-pressure material of patients in polyurethane group was (14±3) min, which was significantly shorter than (18±3) min in polyvinyl alcohol group (=2.788, <0.01). (2) One week after negative-pressure treatment, the maximum pulling force of removing foam material of patients in polyvinyl alcohol group was (6.4±0.4) N, which was significantly lower than (16.7±0.8) N in polyurethane group (=12.010, <0.01). (3) One week after negative-pressure treatment, the volume of wound bleeding of patients in polyvinyl alcohol group was (20±3) mL in the process of removing foam material, which was significantly less than (59±3) mL in polyurethane group (=50.200, <0.01). (4) One week after negative-pressure treatment, HE staining showed that hyperplastic thickness of wound granulation tissue of patients in polyurethane group was (2.3±0.6) mm which was significantly higher than (1.6±0.4) mm in polyvinyl alcohol group ( =6.667, <0.01); immunohistochemical staining showed that the number of microvascular lumen in wound granulation tissue of patients in polyurethane group was significantly more than that in polyvinyl alcohol group; Western blotting showed that protein expression of CD31 in wound granulation tissue of patients in polyurethane group (1.00±0.05) was significantly higher than 0.42±0.03 of polyvinyl alcohol group (=10.490, <0.01). (5)The ratio of R1 to R0 of coefficient of restitution of foam material of patients in polyvinyl alcohol group was 0.39±0.19, which was significantly lower than 0.52±0.16 in polyurethane group (=2.975, <0.01). In patients of polyvinyl alcohol group, the drainage volume of wound exudate of foam material during one week after negative-pressure treatment was (1 258±444) mL, significantly less than (1 658±580) mL of polyurethane group (=3.003, <0.01). (6) One week after negative-pressure treatment, the number of residual foreign body in wounds of patients of polyurethane group was (14.14±0.37) particles, which was significantly more than (3.36±0.15) particles in polyvinyl alcohol group (=26.200, <0.01). The level of bacterial colonization of wounds and eczema rate of skin edge of patients between the two groups were close. Polyurethane foam material is easy to install and operate, relatively difficult to dry and shrink, and has strong ability to discharge wound exudation. Polyurethane foam material is better than polyvinyl alcohol foam material in promoting wound angiogenesis and tissue proliferation. Polyurethane foam material can be chosen firstly for the wounds with need of protecting deep tissues and important organs, as well as the wounds with obvious inflammatory edema and serious contamination. Polyvinyl alcohol foam material is less adherent to wounds, which is better than polyurethane foam material in the aspects of reducing wound bleeding and residual foreign body. Polyvinyl alcohol foam material can be firstly selected to fix and promote skin graft survival after skin grafting, wound bed preparation before skin grafting of burn with large area and deep wound cavity or sinus, etc. Both types of foam materials need to be improved in the aspects of bacterial colonization and prevention and treatment of skin eczema.
比较聚乙烯醇和聚氨酯负压材料在焦痂切开术后治疗全层烧伤创面的效果及特性差异。2018年1月至2019年12月,选取60例符合纳入标准并在徐州仁慈医院住院的全层烧伤患者,进行这项前瞻性随机对照试验。根据随机数字表,将60例患者分为聚乙烯醇组(n = 30,男13例,女17例)和聚氨酯组(n = 30,男14例,女16例),年龄分别为(34±7)岁和(35±6)岁,烧伤总面积分别为4.20%(2.23%,4.90%)和3.89%(2.18%,4.76%),切痂面积分别为2.70%(1.97%,3.42%)和2.87%(2.12%,3.34%)。患者入院后,立即对全层烧伤创面进行清创,每天用碘伏换药。伤后第3天进行切痂。彻底止血并用生理盐水冲洗伤口后,两组患者选择相应的泡沫材料及配套设施进行持续负压治疗1周,负压值设定为 - 19.9 kPa。记录负压材料安装时间。负压治疗1周后,记录去除泡沫材料时的最大拉力,以评估泡沫材料与创面之间的黏附程度。记录去除泡沫材料过程中的出血量,用苏木精 - 伊红(HE)染色观察肉芽组织增生情况,采用免疫组织化学染色和蛋白质印迹法检测CD31表达以表示血管生成情况。记录负压治疗前及治疗1周后泡沫材料恢复系数的R1与R0比值以及负压治疗1周内创面渗出液引流量,以表示泡沫材料对创面渗出液的引流能力。负压治疗1周后,记录创面细菌定植、皮肤边缘残留异物及湿疹发生率。数据采用卡方检验、独立样本t检验和Mann - Whitney U检验进行统计学分析。(1)聚氨酯组患者负压材料安装时间为(14±3)分钟,明显短于聚乙烯醇组的(18±3)分钟(t = 2.788,P < 0.01)。(2)负压治疗1周后,聚乙烯醇组患者去除泡沫材料时的最大拉力为(6.4±0.4)N,明显低于聚氨酯组的(16.7±0.8)N(t = 12.010,P < 0.01)。(3)负压治疗1周后,聚乙烯醇组患者在去除泡沫材料过程中的创面出血量为(20±3)mL,明显少于聚氨酯组的(59±3)mL(t = 50.200,P < 0.01)。(4)负压治疗1周后,HE染色显示聚氨酯组患者创面肉芽组织增生厚度为(2.3±0.6)mm,明显高于聚乙烯醇组的(1.6±0.4)mm(t = 6.667,P < 0.01);免疫组织化学染色显示聚氨酯组患者创面肉芽组织微血管腔数量明显多于聚乙烯醇组;蛋白质印迹法显示聚氨酯组患者创面肉芽组织中CD31蛋白表达量(1.00±0.05)明显高于聚乙烯醇组的0.42±0.03(t = 10.490,P < 0.01)。(5)聚乙烯醇组患者泡沫材料恢复系数的R1与R0比值为0.39±0.19,明显低于聚氨酯组的0.52±0.16(t = 2.975,P < 0.01)。聚乙烯醇组患者负压治疗1周后泡沫材料对创面渗出液的引流量为(1 258±444)mL,明显少于聚氨酯组的(1 658±580)mL(t = 3.003,P < 0.01)。(6)负压治疗1周后,聚氨酯组患者创面残留异物数量为(14.14±0.37)个,明显多于聚乙烯醇组的(3.36±0.15)个(t = 26.200,P < 0.01)。两组患者创面细菌定植水平及皮肤边缘湿疹发生率相近。聚氨酯泡沫材料易于安装操作,相对不易干燥收缩,排出创面渗出液能力强。聚氨酯泡沫材料在促进创面血管生成和组织增生方面优于聚乙烯醇泡沫材料。对于需要保护深部组织和重要器官的创面,以及炎性水肿明显、污染严重的创面,可首选聚氨酯泡沫材料。聚乙烯醇泡沫材料与创面黏附性小,在减少创面出血和残留异物方面优于聚氨酯泡沫材料。在植皮后固定及促进皮片存活、大面积深度烧伤伴伤口腔隙或窦道植皮前创面床准备等方面,可首选聚乙烯醇泡沫材料。两种泡沫材料在细菌定植及皮肤湿疹防治方面均有待改进。