不同植皮方式修复大面积烧伤创面的临床效果分析

发布时间：2018-02-11 17:49

本文关键词： 邮票植皮 meek植皮微粒皮烧伤修复愈合　出处：《现代生物医学进展》2016年04期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：目的:比较邮票植皮、meek植皮以及自体微粒皮移植用于大面积烧伤患者创面修复的临床效果和可行性。方法:回顾性分析我院烧伤科收治的120例大面积烧伤患者的临床资料,根据不同的手术植皮方法分为微粒皮植皮组、Meek植皮组和邮票皮组,每组40例。三组患者入院后均给予常规基础治疗,再根据选择植皮方式的不同实施微粒皮植皮、Meek植皮和邮票皮植皮。对比三组患者的植皮成活率、创面一期愈合率、愈合时间、死亡率、1%烧伤面积(1%TBSA)治疗费用(元)以及康复效果(康复优良率)。结果:邮票皮组植皮成活率明显高于Meek植皮组(P0.05),Meek植皮组植皮成活率明显高于微粒皮植皮组(P0.05)。Meek植皮组和邮票皮组创面愈合时间均明显短于微粒皮植皮组(P0.05)。邮票皮组1%TBSA治疗费用明显低于Meek植皮组(P0.05),Meek植皮组1%TBSA治疗费用明显低于微粒皮植皮组(P0.05)。Meek植皮组和邮票皮组的创面一期愈合率均明显高于微粒皮植皮组(P0.05);Meek植皮组和邮票皮组的死亡率均明显低于微粒皮植皮组(P0.05);meek植皮组的瘢痕最轻,关节功能恢复最好;微粒皮植皮组瘢痕最重,关节功能恢复最差。结论:不同植皮方式用于大面积烧伤创面修复的临床效果各不相同。邮票皮成活率高、抗感染能力强,但扩张比例低,创面愈合效果差;meek皮扩张比例高、康复效果好,但抗感染能力差;微粒皮扩张比例最高,但成活率低,治疗成本高。临床上,应该根据患者的自身情况选择不同的植皮方式。
[Abstract]:Objective: to compare the clinical effect and feasibility of stamp skin grafts with Meek skin grafts and autogenous skin grafts for large area burn patients. Methods: the clinical data of 120 patients with large area burn were analyzed retrospectively. According to the different methods of skin grafting, the patients in each group were divided into Meek skin grafting group and stamp skin grafting group, 40 patients in each group were treated with routine basic treatment after admission. Then according to the different ways of skin grafting, the skin grafts of Meek skin grafts and stamp skin grafts were carried out. The survival rate, primary healing rate and healing time of skin grafts in the three groups were compared. The survival rate of stamp skin group was significantly higher than that of Meek skin graft group P0.05. Meek skin grafting group was significantly higher than that of particle skin grafting group P0.05. Meek skin graft group had significantly higher survival rate than that of microparticle skin graft group P0.05. Meek skin graft group had significantly higher survival rate than that of Meek skin grafting group (1% burn area and 1% TBSA) treatment cost (Yuan) and rehabilitation effect (excellent and good rate of rehabilitation). The healing time of skin wounds in the skin group and stamp skin group was significantly shorter than that in the skin graft group (P 0.05). The cost of treatment of 1TBSA in the stamp skin group was significantly lower than that in the Meek skin graft group (P 0.05) and the skin graft group (1 TBSA) was significantly lower than that in the particle skin grafting group (P 0.05) .Meek skin grafting group and the stamp skin group. The primary wound healing rate of P0.05Meek and stamp skin grafts were significantly higher than that of P0.05Meek grafts and stamp skin grafts, which were significantly lower than those of P0.05Meek grafted skin grafts. The recovery of joint function was the best, the scar was the most serious and the joint function was the worst in the skin grafts group. Conclusion: the clinical effects of different skin grafts for large area burn wound repair are different, the survival rate of stamp skin is high, and the ability of anti-infection is strong. But the proportion of dilatation is low, the wound healing effect is poor, the rate of wound healing is high, the effect of rehabilitation is good, but the ability of anti-infection is poor, the proportion of microskin dilatation is the highest, but the survival rate is low, the cost of treatment is high. Different ways of skin grafting should be chosen according to the patient's own condition.
【作者单位】：空军总医院烧伤整形外科;华北理工大学图书馆;空军总医院骨科;
【基金】：国家自然科学基金项目(81501929)
【分类号】：R644

【相似文献】