首页> 外文期刊>Perfusion >Minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) does not result in less hypertrophic scar formation as compared to conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) with dexamethasone
【24h】

Minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) does not result in less hypertrophic scar formation as compared to conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) with dexamethasone

机译:与使用地塞米松的常规体外循环(CECC)相比,最小的体外循环(MECC)不会导致较少的肥厚性瘢痕形成

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Introduction: Cardiopulmonary bypass surgery is associated with a systemic inflammatory response through the interaction of air, blood and synthetic components in the bypass system and the physical trauma of surgery. An alternative cardiopulmonary bypass system, minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC), has shown promising results in terms of reducing the inflammatory response. We hypothesized that this system may reduce pathological excessive scarring. To study this assumption, the effects of MECC and the effects of conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) with dexamethasone on skin scarring were compared in a standardized wound-healing model. Methods and Results: Pre-sternal scars were evaluated prospectively at four and 12 months postoperatively. The height and width of the scars were measured, using a slide caliper and sonography. The scars were scored using the validated Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Additional risk factors for hypertrophic scar formation were identified by means of a questionnaire. During surgery, MECC was used in 45 patients and CECC/dexamethasone in 42 patients. Four months postoperatively, 22 patients of the MECC group (49%) and 18 patients in the CECC/dexamethasone group (43%) had developed hypertrophic scars. Twelve months postoperatively, the hypertrophic scars in four patients of the MECC group and in two patients of the CECC/dexamethasone group had become normotrophic. In 18 patients of the MECC group (38%) and 16 patients of the CECC group (41%) the scars remained hypertrophic at 12 months. These differences between the two groups were not statistically significant. Conclusion: MECC does not reduce hypertrophic scar formation compared with CECC with dexamethasone, but its use is more beneficial than the use of CECC/dexamethasone because of the circulatory and immunological advantages and because treatment with dexamethasone can be omitted.
机译:简介:心肺旁路手术通过旁路系统中的空气,血液和合成成分的相互作用以及手术的物理创伤与全身炎症反应相关。另一个体外循环系统,最小体外循环(MECC),在减少炎症反应方面已显示出令人鼓舞的结果。我们假设该系统可以减少病理性过度瘢痕形成。为了研究该假设,在标准的伤口愈合模型中比较了MECC和地塞米松常规体外循环(CECC)对皮肤瘢痕形成的影响。方法和结果:在手术后4个月和12个月对胸骨前疤痕进行前瞻性评估。使用游标卡尺和超声检查法测量疤痕的高度和宽度。使用经过验证的患者和观察者疤痕评估量表对疤痕进行评分。通过问卷调查确定了肥厚性瘢痕形成的其他危险因素。在手术过程中,有45例患者使用了MECC,42例患者使用了CECC /地塞米松。术后四个月,MECC组的22例患者(49%)和CECC /地塞米松组的18例患者(43%)出现了肥厚性瘢痕。术后十二个月,MECC组的四名患者和CECC /地塞米松组的两名患者的肥厚性瘢痕已成为营养型。在MECC组的18例患者(38%)和CECC组的16例患者(41%)中,疤痕在12个月时仍然肥大。两组之间的这些差异没有统计学意义。结论:与地塞米松联合使用CECC相比,MECC不能减少肥厚性瘢痕的形成,但由于其循环和免疫学优势,并且可以省略地塞米松的治疗,因此其使用比使用CECC /地塞米松更有利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 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