生物敷料A对比银离子水胶体油纱修复面部Ⅱ度烧伤

Biological dressing A versus Physiotulle Ag in the repair of degree Ⅱ facial burns

背景:在临床治疗面部Ⅱ度烧伤中,生物敷料A及银离子水胶体油纱在吸收渗液、黏附性、抗菌等方面都具有不错的表现。目的:观察面部Ⅱ度烧伤早期清创后生物敷料A对比银离子水胶体油纱覆盖的临床疗效。方法:纳入15例浅Ⅱ度及10例深Ⅱ度面部烧伤患者,将同一患者相同烧伤深度及同等大小的对称创面分两侧治疗,实验侧清创后采用生物敷料A覆盖创面,对照侧清创后采用银离子水胶体油纱覆盖创面,对比两侧创面愈合时间、创面感染情况、换药次数、创面愈合后皮肤质量情况、换药舒适度及敷料覆盖舒适度。结果与结论:在浅Ⅱ度烧伤患者中,实验侧换药次数及敷料覆盖舒适度优于对照侧(P<0.05),换药舒适度差于对照侧(P<0.05),两侧创面愈合时间、创面感染及愈合后皮肤质量情况无差异。在深Ⅱ度烧伤患者中,实验侧创面愈合时间、换药次数、愈合后皮肤质量情况、换药舒适度及敷料覆盖舒适度优于对照侧(P<0.05),换药舒适度差于对照侧(P<0.05),两侧创面感染情况无差异。表明生物敷料A与银离子水胶体油纱修复面部浅Ⅱ度烧伤创面的疗效相似,但生物敷料A修复深Ⅱ度烧伤创面更有利于促进创面愈合,提高创面愈合质量。

BACKGROUND： Biological dressing A （porcine Xenoderm） and Physiotulle Ag （Coloplast） show good effects on the absorption of exudates, adhesion and anti-bacteria in treatment of degree II facial burns. OBJECTIVE： To observe the effectiveness of biological dressing A versus Physiotulle Ag after early debridement of degree II facial burns. METHODS： A total of 15 patients with superficial degree II facial burn and 10 patients with deep degree II facial burns were included. Symmetric facial area of the same patient with the same depth of burn was divided into two parts of same size for treatments. One side was randomly selected as the experimental side, and treated with biological dressing A. The other was selected as the control side and treated with Physiotulle Ag. We compared wound healing time, infection, times of changing dressings, skin after healing, drug change comfort and dressing comfort between the two sides. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION： In patients with superficial grade II facial burn, times of changing dressings and drug change comfort were better in the experimental side than in the control side （P 〈 0.05）, but the dressing comfort was better in the control side than the experimental side （P 〈 0.05）. No significant difference in wound healing time, infection and skin after healing was detected between the two sides. In patients with deep degree II facial burns, wound healing time, times of changing dressings, skin after healing and drug change comfort were better in the experimental side than in the control side （P 〈 0.05）, but the dressing comfort was better in the control side than the experimental side （P 〈 0.05）. No significant difference in infection was detectable between the two sides. Above findings suggested that the therapeutic effects of biological dressing A and Physiotulle Ag were similar in treatment of degree II facial bums. Biological dressing A in repair of deep degree II facial burns promotes the wound healing and elevates the quality of healing.