Sharran M, Balaji Gopisankar, Patel Sukruth Anand, Badhe Bhawana
Department of Orthopaedics, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Pondicherry, India.
Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon, Maax Super Speciality Hospital, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Jun 27. doi: 10.1007/s00266-025-05014-4.
Wound healing and the quality of the scar plays a key role in deciding which dressing technique is better.
The study aimed to determine if primary incisional negative pressure wound therapy provides better scar quality compared to conventional dressing following definitive fixation of closed forearm fractures.
A prospective randomized control trial of patients diagnosed with acute closed forearm fractures who underwent open reduction and internal fixation from April 2022 to January 2024. Patients received either a standard sterile dressing or incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT). The primary outcome was comparing the histopathological scar quality by examining collagen composition at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included assessment of surgical site infection (ASEPSIS Score) and clinical scar assessment using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Univariate logistic regression analyses were performed.
34 patients were included, 47% received iNPWT (n = 16), and 53% received standard dressings (n = 18). With Masson's trichrome stain,15 participants (93.7%) in the intervention group experienced a favourable outcome with an unadjusted relative risk of 1.13 (95% CI: 0.88-1.43, p = 0.341). With Reticulin stain, 12 participants (75%) in the intervention group exhibited desirable results with an unadjusted relative risk of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.58-1.07,p = 0.13). The intervention group had a mean ASEPSIS score of 1.75 with an SD of 2.11 [95% CI-0.62 to 2.87, p = 0.14]. The calculated difference in mean Patient scar scores between the two groups was 7.31 (p = 0.003), and the observer score was 4.5 (p = 0.043).
Patients who underwent iNPWT showed cosmetic satisfaction of scar and favourable outcomes in histopathological assessment with Masson's trichrome stain.
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
伤口愈合及瘢痕质量在决定哪种换药技术更佳方面起着关键作用。
本研究旨在确定在闭合性前臂骨折确定性固定后,与传统换药相比,一期切口负压伤口治疗是否能提供更好的瘢痕质量。
对2022年4月至2024年1月期间诊断为急性闭合性前臂骨折并接受切开复位内固定的患者进行一项前瞻性随机对照试验。患者接受标准无菌换药或切口负压伤口治疗(iNPWT)。主要结局是在12周时通过检查胶原成分比较组织病理学瘢痕质量。次要结局包括手术部位感染评估(ASEPSIS评分)以及使用患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表进行临床瘢痕评估。进行单因素逻辑回归分析。
纳入34例患者,47%接受iNPWT(n = 16),53%接受标准换药(n = 18)。采用马松三色染色法,干预组15名参与者(93.7%)获得良好结局,未调整的相对风险为1.13(95%CI:0.88 - 1.43,p = 0.341)。采用网状纤维染色法,干预组12名参与者(75%)呈现理想结果,未调整的相对风险为0.79(95%CI:0.58 - 1.07,p = 0.13)。干预组的平均ASEPSIS评分为1.75,标准差为2.11 [95%CI - 0.62至2.87,p = 0.14]。两组患者平均瘢痕评分的计算差值为7.31(p = 0.003),观察者评分为4.5(p = 0.043)。
接受iNPWT治疗的患者在瘢痕美容满意度以及采用马松三色染色法进行的组织病理学评估中获得良好结局。
证据水平III:本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据水平。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或作者在线指南www.springer.com/00266 。