Suppr超能文献

两种脱毛方法在 Sprague-Dawley 大鼠中的比较()。

Comparison of Two Hair Removal Methods in Sprague-Dawley Rats ().

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Animal Resources, Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, Maryland;, Email:

Department of Laboratory Animal Resources, Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, Maryland.

出版信息

J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2021 Mar 1;60(2):213-220. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-20-000108. Epub 2021 Feb 23.

Abstract

Rats commonly undergo surgery for research purposes. However, the effects of different methods of hair removal on wound healing and surgical site infections (SSI) in rats has not been evaluated. The current study evaluated 2 hair removal methods, clipping with an electric clipper and using a depilatory agent, and their effect on wound healing and SSI. Swabs for bacterial culture were obtained on Day 0 just after hair removal, after aseptic skin preparation, and on Days 1 and 3 before conducting skin biopsies to assess bacterial load and recolonization. Full-thickness punch biopsies were taken for histopathologic evaluation on Days 0, 1, 3, 7, and 10. The surgical incisions were assigned an ASEPSIS score on Days 1 and 3. The data revealed that the bacterial load was significantly higher with the depilatory method as compared with the clipper method, but only on Day 1. The histopathologic evaluation found no significant difference in wound healing between the 2 methods. Although the ASEPSIS score was significantly higher for the clipping method than for the depilatory method on Day 1, both techniques were equivalent by Day 3. We conclude that both hair removal methods are safe and efficacious components of aseptic technique in rats.

摘要

大鼠通常需要接受手术以进行研究。然而,不同的去毛方法对大鼠伤口愈合和手术部位感染(SSI)的影响尚未得到评估。本研究评估了 2 种去毛方法,即电推剪去毛和脱毛剂去毛,以及它们对伤口愈合和 SSI 的影响。在去毛后第 0 天、无菌皮肤准备后、皮肤活检前第 1 天和第 3 天,分别采集用于细菌培养的拭子,以评估细菌负荷和再定植情况。在第 0、1、3、7 和 10 天,进行全层打孔活检以进行组织病理学评估。在第 1 天和第 3 天,对手术切口进行 ASEPSIS 评分。数据显示,与电推剪去毛方法相比,脱毛剂去毛方法的细菌负荷在第 1 天显著更高,但仅在第 1 天。组织病理学评估发现,两种方法之间的伤口愈合没有显著差异。尽管在第 1 天,电推剪去毛方法的 ASEPSIS 评分明显高于脱毛剂去毛方法,但到第 3 天,两种技术等效。我们得出结论,两种去毛方法都是大鼠无菌技术中安全有效的组成部分。

相似文献

1
Comparison of Two Hair Removal Methods in Sprague-Dawley Rats ().两种脱毛方法在 Sprague-Dawley 大鼠中的比较()。
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2021 Mar 1;60(2):213-220. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-20-000108. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
2
Assessment of 2 Hair Removal Methods in New Zealand White Rabbits ().评估新西兰白兔中的 2 种脱毛方法()。
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2022 May 1;61(3):296-303. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-21-000110. Epub 2022 Feb 28.
3
Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection.术前脱毛以减少手术部位感染。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Nov 9(11):CD004122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004122.pub4.
4
Preoperative hair removal.术前毛发去除。
Can J Surg. 1977 May;20(3):269-71,274-5.
5
Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection.术前脱毛以减少手术部位感染。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19(2):CD004122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004122.pub2.
6
Evaluation of 4 Presurgical Skin Preparation Methods in Mice.评估小鼠 4 种术前皮肤准备方法。
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2019 Jan 1;58(1):71-77. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-18-000047. Epub 2019 Jan 4.
7
Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection.术前脱毛以减少手术部位感染。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19(3):CD004122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004122.pub3.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluation of 3 Alcohol-based Agents for Presurgical Skin Preparation in Mice.评价 3 种酒精类制剂在小鼠术前皮肤准备中的作用。
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2020 Jan 1;59(1):67-73. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-19-000053. Epub 2019 Nov 21.
2
Evaluation of 4 Presurgical Skin Preparation Methods in Mice.评估小鼠 4 种术前皮肤准备方法。
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2019 Jan 1;58(1):71-77. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-18-000047. Epub 2019 Jan 4.
10

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