持续负压引流治疗开放气胸并胸壁感染性伤口40例临床观察

摘要

目的：总结持续负压引流治疗存在治疗矛盾的开放气胸并感染性伤口的临床疗效。方法：回顾性分析存在治疗矛盾的开放气胸并感染性伤口80例患者的临床资料，分别采用持续负压引流和常规开放换药治疗，各40例，比较两组切口清洁时间、皮下气肿治愈时间、换药总数、愈合时间。结果：持续负压引流组切口清洁时间、皮下气肿治愈时间、换药次数、愈合时间均少于常规开放换药组(P<0.05)。结论：持续负压引流治疗存在治疗矛盾的开放气胸并感染性伤口愈合快、疗效显著，住院时间短、降低了住院费用，建议存在治疗矛盾的开放气胸并感染性伤口优先选用持续负压引流治疗。%Objective:To summarize the clinical curative effect with the strategy of continuous negative pressure drainage in the treatment of open pneumothorax and infectious wound with therapeutic paradox.Method:Retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 80 patients with open pneumothorax and infectious wound with therapeutic paradox.According to two different treatment strategies,all the 80 patients were randomly divided into two groups of cuts,namely Group One (n=40) and Group Two(n=40),while continuous negative pressure drainage strategy was used for patients in Group One,and conventional open dressing change strategy was adopted for patients in Group Two. Cleaning time,cure time of subcutaneous emphysema,total number of dressing changes,and healing time of the wound were compared between the two groups.Result:Group One took less time than Group Two in terms of cleaning time,cure time of subcutaneous emphysema, and healing time of the wound,and total number of dressing changes of Group one was less than that of Group Two(P<0.05).Conclusion:The treatment strategy of continuous negative pressure drainage is evidently effective in the treatment of open pneumothorax and infectious wound with therapeutic paradox with less healing time,shortened hospitalization time and reduced hospitalization expenses.Therefore,it is suggested that the treatment method of continuous negative pressure drainage is considered as the first therapeutic choice for open pneumothorax and infectious wound with therapeutic paradox.