摘要
目的:为糖尿病足溃疡患者选择最佳的治疗方法仍是一个难题,比较真空辅助闭合技术与传统治疗方法对糖尿病足溃疡的治疗效果。方法:①对象:选择2004-06/2006-04解放军第二军医大学长海医院收治的糖尿病足溃疡患者38例40个创面。男22例,女16例;年龄55～75岁。②分组及实验过程:随机分组后进行彻底清创,偶数组先接受2周真空辅助闭合技术治疗,再接受2周盐水纱布湿敷;奇数组先接受2周盐水纱布湿敷再接受2周真空辅助闭合技术治疗。③评估:清创结束后、实验过程中更换治疗方法时和实验结束后对患者足部溃疡创面拍摄数码照片以留待数据分析。由非医学从业人员使用VeVMD软件自动获取各创面的长度、宽度、深度,并计算出面积及体积。比较患者治疗前后,以及前2周、后2周中真空辅助闭合技术及盐水纱布湿敷两组间的创面长度、宽度、深度、面积和体积变化。结果:38例患者全部进入结果分析。①患者治疗后创面的长度、宽度、深度、面积及体积均较治疗前尺寸减小(P<0.05)。②治疗期间的前2周及后2周,真空辅助闭合技术和盐水纱布湿敷两组间创面仅深度及体积缩小的百分率有统计学意义,且真空辅助闭合技术治疗前后的减少百分比数值改变要大于盐水纱布湿敷。结论:真空辅助闭合技术在减少糖尿病足溃疡的深度及体积方面要优于传统的盐水纱布湿敷,真空辅助闭合技术是治疗糖尿病足溃疡的有效疗法之一。
AIM： Optimal treatment for diabetic foot ulcers （DFU） is ill defined. This study was aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of vacuum assisted closure （VAC） and conventional moist dressings for DFU.
METHODS： ①Objective： A total of 38 DFU patients with 40 wounds wore enrolled from Changhai Hospital in the Second Military Medical University of Chinese PLA from June 2004 to April 2006, including 22 males and 16 females who aged 55-75 years.②Grouping： All the patients wore divided into 2 groups randomly and the wounds wore sharply debdded. A crossover design was employed with each wound being treated with moist dressings for 2 weeks and the VAC therapy for 2 weeks. Even numbers were treated with the VAC first, followed by the moist dressings, while patients receiving odd numbers were reverse.③Evaluation： Wounds of DFU wore photographed digitally following initial debridement, on the moment when changing the therapy and at the end of study for data analysis. Wound length, width, depth, surface area and volume wore determined by nonmedical staff using VeV MD software. And the result variations were compared between VAC and moist dressing groups before and after trial,during anterior 2 weeks and posterior 2 weeks.
RESULTS： All of 38 patients were involved in the result analysis,①Wound length, width, depth, surface area and volume were all significantly decreased after the trial （P 〈 0.05）.②The percent of the wound depth and volume was significantly different between VAC and moist dressing groups during anterior 2 weeks and posterior 2 weeks. And the percent variation of the wound depth and volume was significantly higher in VAC group than in moist dressing group during the whole trial.
CONCLUSION： VAC is superior to moist dressings for decreasing DFU wound depth and volume. VAC is one of the effective therapies for DFU.
出处
《中国组织工程研究与临床康复》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2007年第44期8908-8911,共4页
Journal of Clinical Rehabilitative Tissue Engineering Research
