Suppr超能文献

新型硅胶凝胶伤口敷料与杆菌肽在毛囊单位提取毛发移植后的比较。

Comparison of a Novel Silicone Gel Wound Dressing vs Bacitracin After Follicular Unit Extraction Hair Transplantation.

作者信息

James Isaac B, Turer David M, DiBernardo Barry E

机构信息

Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

出版信息

Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2021 Dec 13;4:ojab051. doi: 10.1093/asjof/ojab051. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Follicular unit extraction (FUE) hair transplantation subjects are excellent candidates to assess wound dressings. The wound surface area is large and adequately delineated to allow randomization, while in-patient split scalp designs allow patients to serve as their own controls.

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, single-blinded, split-scalp comparison trial compares a novel, film-forming silicone gel-Stratamed (SM; Stratpharma AG, Basel, Switzerland)-to Bacitracin (Bac; McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc., Richmond, VA) in subjects undergoing FUE.

METHODS

Twenty subjects were randomized to receive SM and Bac on alternating sides of the scalp. Primary outcome measures included blinded clinician assessments of edema, erythema, crusting, healing response and outcome preference. Secondary measures included subject-reported assessments of pain and pruritis as well as FaceQ scores taken at post-FUE days two through six.

RESULTS

Twenty subjects were enrolled. Nineteen completed the trial. All subjects were non-smokers, and none had medical comorbidities expected to impact wound healing. An average of 1778 follicles per subject were harvested. No adverse events were reported, and all subjects healed by day 7. Healing response and outcome preference were significantly higher at day 1 in the SM group and by day 7, both groups were similar. There were no significant differences between groups for edema, erythema, or crusting. There were no significant differences between groups for subject-reported outcomes of pain, pruritis, or FACE-Q scores. When asked which product they preferred using, 44% of subjects preferred using SM versus 22% who preferred Bac.

CONCLUSIONS

The SM wound dressing was well-tolerated in patients undergoing FUE. SM may speed the healing response in the early phase of wound healing.

摘要

背景

毛囊单位提取(FUE)植发受术者是评估伤口敷料的理想对象。伤口表面积大且边界清晰,便于随机分组,同时住院患者的头皮分区设计使患者可作为自身对照。

目的

本随机、单盲、头皮分区对照试验,比较新型成膜硅胶凝胶——施德明(SM;瑞士巴塞尔Stratpharma AG公司)与杆菌肽(Bac;美国弗吉尼亚州里士满麦凯森医疗外科公司)对FUE受术者的效果。

方法

20名受试者被随机分为两组,分别在头皮两侧交替使用SM和Bac。主要观察指标包括由盲法评估的临床医生对水肿、红斑、结痂、愈合反应和结果偏好的评价。次要指标包括受试者报告的疼痛和瘙痒评估,以及FUE术后第2至6天的面部质量(FaceQ)评分。

结果

招募了20名受试者,19名完成试验。所有受试者均不吸烟,且无预期会影响伤口愈合的内科合并症。每位受试者平均提取1778个毛囊。未报告不良事件,所有受试者均在第7天愈合。SM组在第1天的愈合反应和结果偏好显著更高,到第7天时,两组情况相似。两组在水肿、红斑或结痂方面无显著差异。两组在受试者报告的疼痛、瘙痒或FaceQ评分结果方面无显著差异。当被问及更喜欢使用哪种产品时,44%的受试者更喜欢使用SM,而更喜欢Bac的受试者为22%。

结论

SM伤口敷料在FUE患者中耐受性良好。SM可能会加速伤口愈合早期的愈合反应。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9c6c/8781770/3093cef86aa9/ojab051_fig1.jpg

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