摘要
目的研究表皮及皮下脂肪层全层缝合法与传统分层缝合法对腰椎后路切开术术中缝合时间及术后脂肪液化概率的影响。方法回顾性分析沈阳军区总医院骨科2016年1—10月行腰椎后路单节段传统切开椎间融合手术的100例患者的临床资料。所有手术均由同一术者施行。根据不同缝合方式,将所有患者分为传统分层缝合组(A组,n=45)和表皮及皮下脂肪层全层缝合组(B组,n=55)。观察并比较两组患者术中缝合时间及术后脂肪液化概率。结果 A组术中缝合时间(34.9±5.9)min,明显长于B组的(18.6±4.2)min,两组间比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A组患者术后切口Ⅰ期愈合41例,脂肪液化4例,脂肪液化概率8.9%(4/45),B组55例患者术后切口均Ⅰ期愈合,脂肪液化概率为0,两组间比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论与传统分层缝合法比较,应用表皮及皮下脂肪层全层缝合法可缩短腰椎后路传统切开手术缝合时间,降低术后切口脂肪液化概率。
Objective To Investigate the effect of layered suture and routine single-layered suture from subcutaneous fatty layer to epidermal layer on intraoperative suturing time and rate of postoperative incision with fat liquefaction during posterior lumbar spinal surgery. Methods There were 100 patients who underwent the conventional posterior spinal surgery in the General Hospital of Sheng Yang Military command from January to November 2016. For different suturing techniques,they were divided into two groups,there were45 patients in the routine single-layered suture group（ Group A） and 55 patients in the layered suture group（ Group B）. Among the two groups,there were no statistical difference in age,sex,body mass index（ BMI）,operative time and blood pressure（ P〉0. 05）. The intraoperative suturing time and rate of postoperative wound with fat liquefaction were compared. Results The suture time in Group A was（ 34. 9 ± 5. 9） minutes,which was longer than（ 18. 6 ± 4. 2） minutes in Group B（ P〈0. 05）. There were 41 cases with postoperative incision Ⅰ healing and 4 cases of fat liquefaction in Group A,the fat liquefaction probability was 8. 9%（ 4/45）. There were 55 patients with postoperative incision Ⅰ healing in Group B,there was no fat liquefaction. The difference was statistically significant between the two groups（ P〈0. 05）. Conclusion The application of layered suture technique from subcutaneous fatty layer to epidermal layer can shorten the intraoperative suturing time in the conventional posterior lumbar spinal surgery and reduce the rate of postoperative incision with fat liquefaction.
出处
《临床军医杂志》
CAS
2018年第2期169-171,共3页
Clinical Journal of Medical Officers
