期刊文献+

探讨微创切口联合负压引流治疗颌面部间隙感染的临床效果 被引量:1

Exploration of the Clinical Effect of Minimally Invasive Incision Combined with Negative Pressure Drainage in the Treatment of Maxillofacial Space Infection
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨微创切口联合负压引流治疗颌面部间隙感染的疗效。方法方便选取该院2013年1月—2016年12月期间收治的80例颌面部间隙感染患者为例,随机将其分为观察组和对照组,每组40例。对照组患者行传统切开引流手术治疗,创口置普通细橡皮管,观察组患者实施微创切口联合负压引流治疗。评价2组患者治愈率,并就患者拔管时间、病原菌清除率及并发症发生率展开比较。结果观察组和对照组临床治愈率分别为82.5%、70.0%,2组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组患者平均拔管时间(4.2±1.3)d、病原菌清除率95.0%均显著低于对照组(5.8±1.7)d、85.0%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组和对照组术后均未发现并发败血症、脓毒血症、脑脓肿、颈部及纵隔脓肿等并发症,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论微创切口联合负压引流治疗颌面部间隙感染有显著的效果,不但创伤小、美观,安全性更高,值得推广。 Objective This paper tries to observe the curative effect of minimally invasive incision combined with negative pressure drainage on maxillofacial space infection. Methods 80 cases of maxillofacial interstitial infection admitted in this hospital from January 2013 to December 2016 were convenient selected and randomly divided into the observation group and the control group with 40 cases in each group. The patients in the control group underwent conventional incision and surgical treatment and the wound was treated with norm thin rubber hose. The patients in the observation group were treated with minimally invasive incision combined with negative pressure drainage. The cure rate of the two groups was evaluated and the incidence of extubation time, pathogen clearance rate and complication rate were compared. Results The clinical cure rates of the observation group and the control group were 82.5% and 70.0% respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups(P 0.05). The mean extubation time was(4.2 ±1.3) d and the pathogens clearance rate was95.0%, significantly lower than the control group of(5.8±1.7) d and 85.0% respectively. The difference was statistically significant(P〈0.05). There were no complications such as sepsis, hyperlipidemia, brain abscess, neck and mediastinal abscess in the observation group and the control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups(P〉0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive incision combined with negative pressure drainage treatment of maxillofacial space infection has a significant effect, with small and minor trauma, which is safe and secure, therefore it is worthy of promotion.
作者 姚立峰
出处 《中外医疗》 2017年第29期103-105,共3页 China & Foreign Medical Treatment
关键词 微创切口 负压引流 颌面部间隙感染 并发症 Minimally invasive incision Negative pressure drainage Maxillofacial interstitial infection Complication
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

二级参考文献37

  • 1孟海峰,李鹏冲.口腔颌面部多间隙感染65例临床分析[J].口腔颌面外科杂志,2004,14(3):252-253. 被引量:18
  • 2Peterson l_J. Contemporary management of deep infections of the neck [J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 1993, 51(3):226- 231.
  • 3Lypka M, Hammoudeh J. Dentoalveolar Infections[J]. Oral Maxillofacial Surg Clin North Am, 2011, 23(3):415-424.
  • 4裘德华.负压引流技术[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2003:132-135.
  • 5庞宝兴,冯元勇,李风梅.口腔颌面部多间隙感染46例病原菌分析[J].中围实用口腔科杂志,2013,6(3):168-170.
  • 6Gronholm L,Lemberg KK,Tjaderhane L,et al.The role of unfinished root canal treatment in odontogenic maxillofacial infections requiring hospital care[J].Clin Oral Investig,2013,17(1):113-121.
  • 7Pandey PK,Umarani M,Kotrashetti S,et al.Evaluation of ultrasonography as a diagnostic tool in maxillofacial space infections[J].J Oral Maxillofac Res,2012,2(4):e4.
  • 8Rega AJ,Aziz SR,Ziccardi VB.Microbiology and antibiotic sensitivities of head and neck space infections of odontogenic origin[J].J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2006,64(9):1377-1380.
  • 9孙翠霞.46例口腔颌面部间隙感染患者的临床治疗及效果分析[J].中外健康文摘,2013,19:141.
  • 10刘海涛,卢新华,叶明华,夏刚.231例颌面部间隙感染临床分析及治疗体会[J].山东医药,2008,48(18):65-65. 被引量:2

共引文献86

同被引文献17

引证文献1

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部