| 郑玉红,陈永翀,王志英,侯朋飞,陈洪权,王瑾,姜阿利.烧伤再生医学预防控制烧伤创面感染技术的临床研究[J].中国烧伤创疡杂志,2012,24(6):432~438. |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1001-0726.2012.6.002 |
| 中文关键词: 烧伤 感染 烧伤再生医疗技术 植皮 MEBO SD-Ag |
| 英文关键词:Burns Infection Burns Regenerative Medicine Skin Grafting MEBO SD-Ag |
| 基金项目:开封市市级科研项目, 项目编号: 汴科字(2011WS050) |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2421 |
| 全文下载次数: 2722 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 对比观察烧伤再生医疗技术(MEBT/ MEBO) 与烧伤外科治疗技术(SD-Ag 和/ 或植皮) 在预防控制烧伤创面感染的临床效果。方法 将60 例符合入选标准的大面积重度烧伤患者随机分为研究组(MEBO组, 30 例) 和对照组(SD-Ag 组, 30 例), 患者入院后分别按照烧伤再生医疗技术或烧伤外科治疗技术的治疗原则, 进行规范的系统治疗及创面处理。观察、记录两组患者的抗生素平均使用天数、抗生素二次使用率、侵袭性感染发生率、不同深度烧伤创面的愈合时间和手术植皮率。结果 经过治疗, 两组患者的创面均实现了愈合, 研究组平均愈合时间34.9 d ±8.6 d, 对照组平均愈合时间39.4 d ±9.1 d。抗生素平均使用天数: 研究组7.5 d, 对照组15.5 d。抗生素二次使用情况: 研究组4 例(13.3%), 对照组9 例(30.0%)。创面侵袭性感染情况: 研究组4 例(13.3%), 对照组20 例(66.7%)。植皮手术: 研究组3 例(10.0%), 对照组20 例(66.7%)。经t 检验或χ2 检验, 两组间各指标相比均有显著性差异(P < 0.05)。结论 烧伤再生医疗技术治疗大面积重度烧伤能够有效预防控制创面感染、减少抗生素使用、促进创面愈合和降低手术植皮率, 收到了较好的预防控制烧伤创面感染的临床效果, 值得临床推广应用和进一步深入研究。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To observe and compare the clinical efficacy of Burns Regenerative Medicine (MEBT/
MEBO) and Burns Surgical Treatment (SD-Ag and/ or skin-grafting) in preventing and controlling wound infection of burns.
Methods A total of 60 hospitalized patients with extensive major burns were enrolled into the study and divided into the
study group (MEBO group, 30 cases) or the control group (SD-Ag group, 30 cases) randomly. After the admission, all the cases were given standard systemic treatment and wound management following the treatment principle of either Burns Regenerative
Medicine or Burns Surgical Treatment. The following indexes including the average administration duration of antibiotics,
the second-time administration rate of antibiotics, the incurrence of invasive infection, and the healing time of
wounds with various depths as well as the rate of skin grafting of the two groups were observed and recorded. Results After
the treatment, the wounds of the two groups all healed. The average healing time of the study group was 34． 9 ±8． 6 d; that
of the control group was 39． 4 ±9． 1 d. As for the average administration duration of antibiotics, it was 7． 5 d for the study
group and 15． 5 d for the control group. The second-time administration rate of antibiotics was 4 (13． 3%) in the study
group and 9 (30． 0%) in the control group. Four cases (13． 3%) in the test group developed invasive wound infection
while the number for the control group was 20 (66． 7%) . Three cases (10%) in the study group and 20 cases in the control
group (66． 7%) accepted skin grafting. Based on t test and χ2 test, all the indexes of the two groups were significantly
different (P <0． 05). Conclusion MEBT/ MEBO approach to treating extensive major burns can obtain great clinical efficacy
in terms of effectively preventing and controlling the occurrence of wound infection, reducing the administration of antibiotics,
promoting wound healing and reducing the incurrence of skin grafting. It deserves to be promoted for wide application
and further research. |
|
|
|
|
