负压封闭引流与传统的打包加压技术在治疗足部皮肤撕脱伤中的临床效果比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2017.07.018

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (0)

Download: PDF (2859 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective: To discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the two treatment methods, by comparing and analyzing the clinical effects of skin replantation in situ combined with vacuum sealing drainage (VSD) and skin in situ replantation combined with packing skin grafting for the treatment of foot skin avulsion injury. Methods: 50 cases with foot skin avulsion injury were treated with emergency skin in situ replantation combined with VSD technique and in situ replantation combined with skin grafting from January 2011 to September 2016. 25 cases were underwent VSD combined with in situ skin replantation as experimental group, and other 25 cases were accepted the traditional package with in situ skin replantation as control group. The percentage of skin grafting, the rate of wound infection, the rate of subcutaneous hematoma, the time of operation, the length of hospital stay, the number of dressing change and the reoperation rate were observed in two groups. Result: After the emergency operation, the per patient's survival rate of skin graft of VSD group is 97.2±5.97% and the traditional packaging technology group is 87.2±13.61 %.(p＜0.05). The hospitalization time, operative time, and the times of postoperative dressing change of experimental group were significantly shorter than those of control group(p＜0.05). The reoperation rate and the occurrence rates of infection and subcutaneous hematoma of experimental group were lower than those of control group (p＜0.05) . Conclusions: The emergency use of skin in situ replantation in situ skin with VSD suction treatment of foot skin avulsion injury compared to traditional replantation combined with packing pressure method, can improve the individual patients with skin graft survival percentage, reduce the skin wound infection and subcutaneous hematoma rate, reduce the probability the second stage operation to repair and reduce the need to repair the wound area, shorten the operation time, hospitalization time, dressing change times.

Key words： Skin tearing injury of foot VSD (Vacuum sealing drainage) The situ implant for skin Traditional packaging technology

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	WANG Wei
	PAN Zhaohui
	ZHAO Yuxiang

Cite this article:

WANG Wei,PAN Zhaohui,ZHAO Yuxiang. Comparison of Clinical Effects of Vacuum Sealing Drainage and Traditional Packing and Compression Techniques in the Treatment of Foot Skin Avulsion[J]. HeBei Med, 2017, 23(7): 1113-1117.

URL:

http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2017.07.018 OR http://www.hbyxzzs.cn/EN/Y2017/V23/I7/1113

[1] 刘伟,宣昭鹏,路来金,等.四肢皮肤脱套伤原位回植相关临床分析[J].中华显微外科杂志,2012,35(01):74~76.
[2] Fleischmann W, Strecker W, Bombelli M, et al. Vacuum sealing as treatment of soft tissue damage in open fractures[J].Unfallchirurg,2003, 96(9): 488~492.
[3] Attar KH,ImranD,lyerS.Vaccum-assisted closure(VAC) therapy in the management of digital pulp defects[J].Acta Chir Plast,2007,49(3):75~76.
[4] SenchenKovA,Petty PM,Knoetgen J 3rd,etal.Outcomes of skin graft reconstructions with the use of Vaccum assisted Closure(VAC(R)) dressing for irradiated extremity sarcoma defects[J].Word SurgOnwl,2007,5:13.
[5] Qiu Hua De. The closed negative pressure drainage technology[M].Beijing: people's medical publishing house, 2003.242.
[6] Nie LJ, Song H, Cai W, et al. The research progress of negativepressure wound therapy technology[J].Infection, inflammation andrepair, 2008, 9(3): 191~192.
[7] Kakagia D, Karadimas E, Drosos G, et al. Vacuum-assisted closuredowngrades reconstructive demands in high-risk patients with severelower extremity injuries[J].Acta Chir Plast, 2009, 51(3-4): 59~64.
[8] Zannis J, Angobaldo J, Marks M, et al. Comparison of fasciotomywound closures using traditional dressing changes and thevacuum-assistedclosure device[J].Ann Plast Surg, 2009,62 (4):407~409.
[9] 夏远军,章莹,吴文,等.负压封闭引流与常规敷料加压包扎治疗大面积皮肤撕脱伤的疗效对比研究[J].中国骨科临床与基础研究杂志,2011,2:97~100.
[10] 李望舟, 李金清, 李学拥, 等. V A C对猪爆炸伤感染创面细菌数和 G⁺ 和 G^- 比例的影响[J].第四军医大学学报, 2007, 28( 4) : 321~ 323.
[11] 许龙顺, 乔骋, 陈绍宗,等.负压对感染创面细菌清除率的影响[J].陕西医学杂志,2007,36(12):1590~1605.
[12] MoranSG, WindhamST, Cross JM, et al .Vacuum- assistedcomplex woundclosurewithelastic vessel loopaugmentation :anoveltechnique[J].JWoundCare, 2003, 12( 6) : 212~ 213.
[13] Morykwas MJ, Argenta LC, Shelton Brown EI, et al. Vacuum assisted closure: A new method for wound control and treatment:Animal studies and basic foundation[J].Ann Plast Surg, 1997, 38(6): 553~562.
[14] 李靖, 陈绍宗,李学拥,等.封闭负压引流技术对创面微循环流速和血管口径影响的实验研究[J].现代康复,2004,(12):1848~1849.
[15] 李靖,陈绍宗,许龙顺,等.封闭负压引流技术对兔耳创面毛细血管密度及创面愈合的影响[J].中国临床康复,2004,8(5):904~905.
[16] 陈绍宗,曹大勇,李金清,等.封闭负压引流技术对创面愈合过程中原癌基因表达的影响[J].中华整形外科杂志,2005,21(3):197~200.
[17] 石冰,钱存荣,邝芳,等.封闭负压引流技术对人慢性创面中金属基质蛋白酶表达及分布的影响[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2007,11(13):2483~2486.
[18] 李跃军,曹大勇,陈绍宗.封闭负压引流技术对创面愈合过程纤溶酶原激活剂级联表达的影响[J].中华整形外科杂志,2006,22(4):306~309.
[19] 汤苏阳,陈绍宗,胡昭华,等.封闭负压引流技术对失感觉神经支配创伤愈合中Bcl-2与NGF/NGFmRNA表达的影响[J].中华整形外科杂志,2004,20(2):139~142.
[20] 吕小星,陈绍宗,李学拥,等.封闭负压引流技术对创周组织水肿及其血管通透性的影响[J].中国临床康复,2003,7(8):1244~1245.
[21] Kakagia D, Karadimas E, Drosos G, et al. Vacuum-assisted closuredowngrades reconstructive demands in high-risk patients with severelower extremity injuries[J].Acta Chir Plast, 2009, 51(3-4): 59~64.
[22] Morykwas MJ, Argenta LC, Shelton Brown EI, et al. Vacuum assistedclosure: A new met hod for wound control and treatment:Animalstudies and basic foundation[J].Ann Plast Surg, 1997, 38(6): 553~562.
[23] Venturi ML, Attinger CE, Mesbahi AN, et al. Mechanisms and clinicalapp lications of the vacuum assisted closure (VAC) device: A review[J].Am Clin Dermatol, 2005, 6(3): 185~194.