|
|
|
| Effects of water knife system debridement combined with vacuum assisted closure on clinical efficacy, wound healing and hemodynamics of diabetic foot ulcer |
| LIU Shuyan |
| Tangshan Workers' Hospital, Tangshan 063000, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To investigate the effects of waterknife system defibrillation combined with vacuum assisted closure (VAC) on clinical efficacy, wound healing and hemodynamics of diabetic foot ulcer patients. Methods 123 patients with diabetic foot ulcers admitted to our hospital from June 2019 to June 2021, and according to the randomized parallel control study, they were divided into the control group of 64 cases (water knife system debridement) and the observation group of 59 cases (water knife system debridement+vacuum assisted closure technology). Therapeutic efficacy, wound healing, hemodynamic indexes and recurrence rate 6 months after operation were compared between the two groups. Results The total effective rate of observation group was 94.92% higher than 79.69% of control group; after treatment, the ulcer area in the two groups decreased, the partial pressure of oxygen in the wound increased, and the pH value of the wound decreased, and the wound healing index in the observation group was better; after treatment, blood flow velocity, inner diameter of blood vessels, resistance index (RI) 、pulse index (PI) in the two groups were increased, and the above indexes in the observation group were higher than those in the control group; the recurrence rate in the control group was significantly higher than that in the observation group (26.56% VS 8.47%). Conclusion Water jet system debridement combined with VAC in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer has great advantages in improving hemodynamic indexes and reducing recurrence rate.
|
|
Received: 05 May 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 郭立新. 2021年糖尿病领域年度重大进展回顾[J]. 中华糖尿病杂志, 2022, 14(1): 1-8.
[2] Argenta LC, Morykwas MJ.Vacuum-assisted closure: a new method for wound control and treatment: clinical experience[J]. Ann Plast Surg, 1997, 38(6): 563-576.
[3] 朱传正, 张力鹏, 陈祝锋, 等. 水动力清创系统在临床中的应用进展[J]. 创伤外科杂志, 2019, 21(12): 952-955.
[4] 徐俊, 许樟荣. 国际糖尿病足工作组《糖尿病足溃疡周围动脉病变诊断、预后与管理指南 (2019版) 》解读[J]. 国际内分泌代谢杂志, 2020, 40(6): 425-429.
[5] 梁晓丹. 负压封闭引流技术治疗 Wagner 分级法2-4级糖尿病足患者临床疗效评价[J]. 医药论坛杂志, 2019, 40(3): 44-48.
[6] Yeung E, Kaster BM, Scheese BD, et al.Closing Contaminated Fascial Defects With Synthetic Mesh and a Vacuum-Assisted Closure Device[J]. J Surg Res, 2021, 259: 313-319.
[7] 邓锦华, 廖锵云, 方镇国. 皮瓣移植术联合负压封闭引流术对糖尿病足溃疡患者皮损面积及溃疡情况的影响[J]. 黑龙江医学, 2021, 45(15): 1585-1586.
[8] 屈姣姣, 周红梅, 郭中书. 封闭负压疗法联合清创游离植皮治疗糖尿病足溃疡的效果[J]. 当代医学, 2021, 27(35): 61-63.
[9] 修一平, 王洪一, 张丽艳, 等. 负压封闭引流术联合胶原酶清创治疗糖尿病足溃疡的效果分析[J]. 中国临床实用医学, 2021, 12(4): 3-6.
[10] 徐俊, 许樟荣. 国际糖尿病足工作组糖尿病足溃疡预防及创面干预 (2019年版) 指南解读[J]. 国际内分泌代谢杂志, 2021, 41(6): 661-664.
[11] 李旭文, 宋培军, 熊竹友, 等. 超声清创水刀联合封闭负压引流技术在糖尿病足溃疡中的应用[J]. 蚌埠医学院学报, 2022, 47(8): 1007-1010.
[12] 林双, 袁丽, 杨小玲, 等. 超声水刀联合负压滴灌治疗在慢性难愈性糖尿病足中的应用效果[J]. 四川医学, 2019, 40(7): 718-722.
[13] 赖晓敏. 用水刀清创系统联合医用胶原蛋白海绵治疗糖尿病足的效果研究[J]. 当代医药论丛, 2019, 17(4): 35-36.
[14] 王国阳, 孙权. 自体富血小板凝胶联合负压辅助闭合技术治疗糖尿病足溃疡的效果[J]. 临床合理用药杂志, 2021, 14(23): 165-167.
[15] 李丙蓉, 侯丽梅, 刘瑶丽, 等. 超声水刀清创系统联合封闭式负压引流冲洗在慢性糖尿病足创面治疗中的应用[J]. 解放军医药杂志, 2020, 32(9): 30-33+43.
[16] 毛小莉. 创面床准备联合封闭式负压引流治疗3~4期压力性损伤的护理研究[J]. 中国现代医药杂志, 2021, 23(10): 82-84.
[17] 童景莲, 钟书凌. 负压辅助愈合治疗系统在糖尿病足溃疡患者中的家庭应用研究[J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2021, 27(17): 2664-2667.
[18] 张朦, 章磊, 杜琳. VAC联合邮票植皮修复儿童难愈性创面疗效探讨[J]. 中国美容医学, 2020, 29(12): 82-86.
[19] 马绮文, 钟书凌, 王晓洲, 等. VAC技术协同赋能模式在糖尿病足溃疡患者的应用[J]. 实用糖尿病杂志, 2020, 16(03): 130-131.
[20] 陈东亮, 张增方, 郑良孝, 等. VAC联合PRP凝胶技术治疗足外伤后创面的效果[J]. 青岛大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 56(1): 101-104. |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 20 
