| 卿 燕,魏 平.湿润烧伤膏与负压封闭引流技术治疗糖尿病足的疗效对比[J].中国烧伤创疡杂志,2015,(4):263~265. |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 湿润烧伤膏 负压封闭引流 糖尿病足 溃疡 疗效 |
| 英文关键词:Moisture Exposed Burn Ointment (MEBO) Vacuum Sealing Drainage(VSD) Therapeutic effect |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2599 |
| 全文下载次数: 4822 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 对比观察湿润烧伤膏与负压封闭引流技术治疗糖尿病足的临床疗效。方法 将40例糖尿病足患者随机分为治疗组和对照组，每组20例，在调控血糖、防止感染等全身综合治疗基础上，治疗组患者全程采用湿润烧伤膏治疗，每日换药2~4次；对照组患者采用负压封闭引流技术治疗，对比观察两组患者治疗效果。结果 对照组治愈9例，好转2例，总有效率为55%；治疗组治愈13例，好转5例，总有效率为90%，两组疗效对比，P＜0.05，差异具有统计学意义。结论 糖尿病足患者溃疡创面应用湿润烧伤膏治疗的效果明显优于负压封闭引流技术。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To analyze the clinical efficacy between the moist exposed burn ointment (MEBO) and vacuum sealing drainage(VSD) in the treatment of diabetic foot patients. Methods A total of 40 DFU patients were randomly divided into Treatment Group and Control Group, 20 cases each. While systemic treatment of controlling blood sugar and anti-infection was conducted, the Treatment Group was treated with MEBO with 2-4 dressing changes per day; and the Control Group was treated with VSD. Therapeutic effect in both groups was observed comparatively. Results Nine in Control Group were healed, two improved, the total effective rate was 55%; thirteen in Treatment Group healed and five improved, total effective rate was 90%. Effect comparison between the two groups got a P < 0.05, meaning the difference is statistically significant. Conclusion For the treatment of diabetic foot wound, the clinical effect of MEBO is remarkably better than VSD. |
|
|
|
|
