Braided absorbable sutures for traumatic wounds.
作者信息
Thakkar M, Bednarz B, Henderson J
机构信息
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Southmead Hospital, Southmead Road, BS10 5NB, United Kingdom.
出版信息
JPRAS Open. 2021 Feb 20;28:64-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jpra.2021.02.001. eCollection 2021 Jun.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Braided absorbable sutures for traumatic wounds.用于创伤伤口的编织可吸收缝线。
JPRAS Open. 2021 Feb 20;28:64-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jpra.2021.02.001. eCollection 2021 Jun.
2
A comparison of cosmetic outcomes of lacerations on the extremities and trunk using absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures.使用可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线对四肢和躯干裂伤的美容效果进行比较。
Acad Emerg Med. 2014 Jun;21(6):637-43. doi: 10.1111/acem.12387.
3
Vicryl Rapide versus Vicryl suture in skin closure of the hand in children: a randomized prospective study.儿童手部皮肤缝合中薇乔速即纱缝线与薇乔缝线的比较：一项随机前瞻性研究
J Hand Surg Br. 2005 Feb;30(1):90-1. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsb.2004.08.005.
4
Coated Vicryl synthetic absorbable sutures.涂层薇乔合成可吸收缝线。
Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1980 Jun;150(6):843-4.
5
A randomised controlled trial of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for skin closure after open carpal tunnel release.一项关于开放性腕管松解术后皮肤缝合使用可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线的随机对照试验。
J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2012 May;37(4):350-3. doi: 10.1177/1753193411422334. Epub 2011 Oct 10.
6
Two-month longitudinal study of mechanical properties of absorbable sutures used in orthopedic surgery.骨科手术中使用的可吸收缝线力学性能的两个月纵向研究。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2016 Oct 12;11(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s13018-016-0451-5.
7
Episiotomy repair: Vicryl versus Vicryl rapide.会阴切开术修复：薇乔缝线与快薇乔缝线对比
Ulster Med J. 2000 May;69(1):27-9.
8
9
Incisional hernia after abdominal closure with slowly absorbable versus fast absorbable, antibacterial-coated sutures.腹部缝合时使用慢吸收与快吸收、抗菌涂层缝线，哪种缝线导致切口疝的风险更低？
Surgery. 2012 Mar;151(3):398-403. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2011.08.004. Epub 2011 Nov 16.
10
Use of 7/0 Vicryl (coated polyglactin 910) and 7/0 Vicryl-rapide (irradiated polyglactin 910) in skin closure in ophthalmic plastic surgery.7/0 薇乔（涂层聚乙醇酸910）和7/0 快薇乔（辐照聚乙醇酸910）在眼科整形手术皮肤缝合中的应用。
Orbit. 2002 Mar;21(1):1-8. doi: 10.1076/orbi.21.1.1.2604.
本文引用的文献
1
Absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for skin closure after carpal tunnel decompression surgery.腕管减压术后皮肤缝合用可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 1;2(2):CD011757. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011757.pub2.
2
Decreased Bacterial Adherence, Biofilm Formation, and Tissue Reactivity of Barbed Monofilament Suture in an In Vivo Contaminated Wound Model.在体内污染伤口模型中，带倒刺单丝缝线的细菌黏附、生物膜形成及组织反应性降低。
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Apr;32(4):1272-1279. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.11.010. Epub 2016 Nov 24.
3
Absorbable Versus Nonabsorbable Sutures for Skin Closure: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.用于皮肤缝合的可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线：随机对照试验的Meta分析
Ann Plast Surg. 2016 May;76(5):598-606. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000418.
4
Bacterial adherence to suture materials.细菌对缝线材料的黏附。
J Surg Educ. 2011 Mar-Apr;68(2):101-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2010.09.015. Epub 2010 Nov 20.
5
Absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures in the management of traumatic lacerations and surgical wounds: a meta-analysis.可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线在创伤性撕裂伤和手术伤口处理中的应用：一项荟萃分析。
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2007 May;23(5):339-44. doi: 10.1097/01.pec.0000270167.70615.5a.
Zotero 插件