|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]董瑞一,王丽华,买丽丽,等.钉合与缝合跟骨骨折手术切口的疗效比较[J].国际骨科学杂志,2021,05:319-322.
　DONG Ruiyi,WANG Lihua,MAI Lili,et al.Comparison of the therapeutic effects of stapling and suturing in calcaneal skin incision[J].International Journal of Orthopaedics,2021,05:319-322.
点击复制

钉合与缝合跟骨骨折手术切口的疗效比较(PDF)

《国际骨科学杂志》[ISSN:1673-7083/CN:31-1952/R]

期数:
2021年05期
页码:
319-322
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2021-10-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of the therapeutic effects of stapling and suturing in calcaneal skin incision
作者:
董瑞一; 王丽华; 买丽丽; 苑娜; 郑继会; 武永东; 魏金栋
061011, 河北省沧州中西医结合医院创伤骨科
Author(s):
DONG Ruiyi;  WANG Lihua;  MAI Lili;  YUAN Na;  ZHENG Jihui;  WU Yongdong;  WEI Jindong.
Department of Orthopaedics Trauma, Cangzhou Hospital of Integrated TCM-WM Hebei, Cangzhou 061011, China
关键词:
钉合;  跟骨骨折;  缝合;  切口;  皮缘坏死
Keywords:
Stapling;  Calcaneal fracture;  Suture;  Incision;  Skin necrosis
分类号:
-
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1673-7083.2021.05.013
文献标识码:
-
摘要:
目的 比较钉合与缝合两种方法闭合跟骨骨折手术切口的疗效。方法 根据纳入及排除标准,纳入河北省沧州中西医结合医院2018年1月至2020年1月收治的跟骨骨折患者96例,按照随机数表法分为A 组(钉合组)和 B 组(缝合组),每组48人。两组均采用切开复位内固定治疗,A 组采用一次性皮肤缝合器钉合切口,B 组采用强生普通1号丝线缝合切口。比较两组闭合切口速度、术后切口渗出持续时间,采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)评估术后第1、3天及切口愈合后拆钉(线)时的疼痛程度。观察术后两组炎性反应、皮缘坏死、切口裂开、内固定物外露、切口感染、过敏反应发生率及术后3个月时切口“蜈蚣状”瘢痕发生率。结果 所有患者术后均获得3个月的随访。A 组闭合切口速度明显快于B组,皮缘坏死率、“蜈蚣状”瘢痕发生率及拆钉(线)时疼痛VAS评分明显低于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组炎性反应、切口裂开、切口感染发生率和术后渗出时间以及第1、3天疼痛VAS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组均未出现内固定物外露及过敏反应等并发症。结论 钉合跟骨手术切口可以缩短手术时间,降低手术并发症发生率,减轻患者痛苦,且能达到较好的美容效果,具有较大的应用价值。
Abstract:
Department of Orthopaedics Trauma, Cangzhou Hospital of Integrated TCM-WM Hebei, Cangzhou 061011, China

参考文献/References

[1] Zhang Z, Wang Z, Zhang Y, et al. Risk factors for increased postoperative drainage of calcaneal fracturesafter open reduction and internal fixation:an observational study[J]. Medicine(Baltimore), 2018, 97(32): e11818.
[2] Zhang G, Ding S, Ruan Z. Minimally invasive treatment of calcaneal fracture[J]. J Int Med Res, 2019, 47(8): 3946-3954.
[3] Duymus TM, Mutlu S, Mutlu H, et al. Need for bone grafts in the surgical treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures[J]. J Foot Ankle Surg, 2017, 56(1): 54-58.
[4] Folk JW, Starr AJ, Early JS. Early wound complications of operative treatment of calcaneus fractures: analysis of 190 fractures[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 1999, 13(5): 369-372.
[5] Rastegar S, Ravanbod H, Moradi M, et al. Extensile approach versus minimally invasive technique in management of calcaneus fractures[J]. Int J Burns Trauma, 2021, 11(1): 27-33.
[6] Shih JT, Kuo CL, Yeh TT, et al. Modified Essex-Lopresti procedure with percutaneous calcaneoplasty for comminuted intra-articular calcaneal fractures: a retrospective case analysis[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2018, 19(1): 77.
[7] Chen J, Yang Z, Kong C, et al. Minimally invasive dual incision with mini plate internal fixation improves outcomes over 30 months in 20 patients with Sanders type Ⅲ calcaneal fractures[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2020, 15(1): 167.
[8] Zhan J, Hu C, Zhu N, et al. A modified tarsal sinus approach for intra-articular calcaneal fractures[J]. J Orthop Surg(Hong Kong), 2019, 27(2): 2309499019836165.
[9] Jandová S, Pazour J. Limited versus extended lateral approach for osteosynthesis of calcaneal fractures: comparison of temporal and dynamic parameters of the gait cycle[J]. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech, 2018, 85(1): 57-61.
[10] Lim EA, Leung JP. Complications of intraarticular calcaneal fractures[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2001, 391: 7-16.
[11] Zhang F, Tian H, Li S, et al. Meta-analysis of two surgical approaches for calcaneal fractures: sinus tarsi versus extensile lateral approach[J]. ANZ J Surg, 2017, 87(3): 126-131.
[12] Mehta CR, An VV, Phan K, et al. Extensile lateral versus sinus tarsi approach for displaced, intra-articular calcaneal fractures: a meta-analysis[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2018, 13(1): 243.
[13] Jahan K, Shrestha R, Adhikari P, et al. A comparative study between staplers and suture(silk 2-0)for skin closure in cesarean sections at gandaki medical college teaching hospital[J]. J-GMC N, 2018, 10(2): 1-5.
[14] Dhama V, Chaudhary R, Singh S, et al. Three techniques for skin closure in caesarean section(stapler, absorbable subcuticular, non-absorbable subcuticular suture)[J]. J Obstet Gynecol Res, 2016, 3(1): 68-72.
[15] Lal V, Shaikh TP, Narayan P, et al. Study of comparison between skin sutures and skin staplers: 400 case studies[J]. Int J Res Med Sci, 2015, 3(1): 277-281.
[16] Huda F, Gajula B, Singh S, et al. Staples versus sutures for skin closure in standard four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective cohort study[J]. Cureus, 2021, 13(3): e13725.
[17] Jadhao M, Raut C, Shaikh N, et al. Stapler versus polyamide sutures for skin closure for sternal wounds in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: our experience[J]. Kardiochir Torakochirurgia Pol, 2020, 17(2): 83-86.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
基金项目: 沧州市科学计划自筹经费项目(183302119)
更新日期/Last Update: 2021-10-01