首页> 外文期刊>Journal of clinical neuroscience: official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia >Dressings and drains in posterior spine surgery and their effect on wound complications
【24h】

Dressings and drains in posterior spine surgery and their effect on wound complications

机译:后脊柱手术中的敷料和引流管及其对伤口并发症的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The purpose of this study was to systematically search, critically appraise and summarize published randomized control trials (RCT) and non-RCT examining the effect of drains and dressings on wound healing rates and complications in posterior spine surgery. The use of post-operative drains and the type of postoperative dressing is at the discretion of the treating surgeon with no available clinical guidelines. Drains will theoretically decrease incidence of post-operative hematoma and therefore, potentially decrease the risk of neurologic compromise when the neural elements have been exposed. Occlusive dressings have more recently been advocated, potentially maintaining a sterile barrier for longer time periods post-operatively. A systematic review of databases from 1969-2013 was undertaken. All papers examining drains in spine surgery and dressings in primary healing of surgical wounds were included. Revman (version 5.2; The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was used to test for overall treatment effect, clinical heterogeneity and risk of bias. Of the papers identified, 1348 examined postoperative drains in spine surgery and 979 wound dressings for primary wound healing of all surgical wounds. Seven studies were included for analysis for post-operative drains and 10 studies were analyzed for primary wound healing. The use of a post-operative drain did not influence healing rates and had no effect secondarily on infection (odds ratio [OR] 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-2.30). We were not able to establish whether surgical drains prevent hematomas causing neurologic compromise. There was a slight advantage to using occlusive dressings versus non-occlusive dressings in wound healing (OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.44-3.02). Incisional vacuum dressings as both an occlusive barrier and superficial drainage system have shown promise for wounds at risk of dehiscence. There is a relatively high risk of bias in the methodology of many of the studies reviewed. We recommend favoring of occlusive dressings based on heterogeneous and potentially biased evidence. Drain use does not affect wound healing based on similar evidence. Incisional vacuum dressings have shown promise in managing potentially vulnerable wounds. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:这项研究的目的是系统地搜索,严格评估和总结已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)和非RCT,以检查引流管和敷料对后路脊柱外科手术伤口愈合率和并发症的影响。术后引流的使用和术后敷料的类型由主治医生决定,没有可用的临床指南。从理论上讲,排泄将降低术后血肿的发生率,因此,当神经元已暴露时,可能会降低神经系统损害的风险。最近有人提倡使用闭塞敷料,这可能会在术后较长时间保持无菌屏障。对1969-2013年的数据库进行了系统的审查。包括所有检查脊柱手术引流管和手术伤口初步愈合敷料的论文。 Revman(5.2版; Nordic Cochrane中心,英国牛津的Cochrane合作社)用于测试总体治疗效果,临床异质性和偏倚风险。在已鉴定的论文中,有1348例检查了脊柱外科手术后的引流管,以及979例伤口敷料,用于所有外科伤口的原发性伤口愈合。包括七项研究以分析术后引流,并对十项研究进行原发性伤口愈合分析。术后引流的使用不影响治愈率,其次对感染没有影响(几率[OR] 1.33; 95%置信区间[CI] 0.76-2.30)。我们无法确定手术引流管是否可以预防引起神经系统损害的血肿。在伤口愈合中,使用闭塞敷料相对于非闭塞敷料有一点优势(OR 2.09; 95%CI 1.44-3.02)。切口真空敷料既是闭合性屏障,又是浅层引流系统,显示出伤口有裂开危险的希望。在许多所审查的研究方法中,存在偏倚的风险相对较高。我们建议基于异质性和潜在偏见的证据支持闭塞敷料。根据类似证据,使用引流管不会影响伤口愈合。切开真空敷料已显示出在处理潜在脆弱伤口方面的前景。 (C)2015 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号