期刊文献+

自体富血小板血浆治疗藏毛窦术后创面临床疗效的Meta分析

Meta-analysis of the Clinical Efficacy of Autologous Platelet-rich Plasma in Treating Pilonidal Sinus Postoperative Wounds
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的系统评价自体富血小板血浆(aPRP)治疗藏毛窦(PS)术后创面的应用效果。方法检索PubMed、Emabse、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国期刊全文数据库(中国知网)、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国学术期刊数据库(万方)、中文科技期刊数据库(维普)等数据库自建库至2022年9月公开发表的aPRP治疗PS术后创面的中英文临床随机对照试验文献,根据纳入与排除标准筛选文献后进行质量评价,并使用RevMan 5.4软件对纳入文献进行统计分析。结果共纳入文献7篇,包括615例PS患者。Meta分析结果显示,与常规敷料包扎处理相比,在常规敷料包扎基础上联合应用aPRP更能有效缩短PS术后创面愈合时间、疼痛持续时间及患者回归正常生活及工作时间,降低术后创面视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分(MD=-16.37、-9.45、-8.91、-3.19,95%CI为-24.55~-8.19、-15.60~-3.31、-9.44~-8.38、-5.04~-1.34,P<0.0001、P=0.003、P<0.00001、P=0.0007),但在降低创面感染率及复发率方面无明显差异(RR=0.75、0.60,95%CI为0.21~2.72、0.15~2.42,P=0.66、0.47)。结论在常规敷料包扎基础上联合应用aPRP能有效缩短PS术后创面愈合时间、疼痛持续时间及患者回归正常生活及工作时间,降低术后疼痛程度。 Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy of autologous platelet-rich plasma(aPRP)in treating pilonidal sinus(PS)postoperative wounds.Methods Literature search was conducted in such databases as PubMed,Emabse,Cochrane Library,Web of Science,China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI),Chinese Biomedical Literature Database,China Science Periodical Database(Wanfang),China Science and Technology Journal Database(VIP)to retrieve Chinese and English clinical randomized controlled trials studying aPRP in the treatment of PS postoperative wounds published between the setting-up of the databases and September 2022,the obtained papers were evaluated based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria,and qualified papers were analyzed statistically by using the RevMan 5.4 software.Results A total of 7 papers were qualified and included into the study,with 615 PS patients involved.Meta-analysis showed that,compared with the conventional dressing and bandaging treatment,the combined application of aPRP and the conventional dressing and bandaging treatment was more effective in shortening the healing time of PS postoperative wounds,the duration of patients’pain,and time of patients back to normal life and work,and reducing post-operative wound visual analogue scale(VAS)scores of patients(MD=-16.37,-9.45,-8.91 and-3.19,95%CI:-24.55--8.19,-15.60--3.31,-9.44--8.38,-5.04--1.34,P<0.0001,P=0.003,P<0.00001,P=0.0007),but there was no significant difference in reducing wound infection and recurrence rates(RR=0.75 and 0.60,95%CI:0.21-2.72,0.15-2.42,P=0.66 and 0.47).Conclusion The combined application of aPRP and conventional dressing and bandaging treatment can effectively shorten the PS postoperative wound healing time,pain duration,and time of patients back to normal life and work,and alleviate the degree of postoperative pain.
作者 邓旭辉 邓如非 邹立津 张友来 曾元临 DENG Xuhui;DENG Rufei;ZOU Lijin;ZHANG Youlai;ZENG Yuanlin(Department of Burn Surgery,The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University,Nanchang,Jiangxi 330006,China)
出处 《中国烧伤创疡杂志》 2024年第5期345-350,共6页 The Chinese Journal of Burns Wounds & Surface Ulcers
关键词 自体富血小板血浆 生长因子 藏毛窦 创面 荟萃分析 Autologous platelet-rich plasma Growth factors Pilonidal sinus Wound Meta-analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献33

  • 1Moher D,Liberati A,Tetzlaff J. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses:the PRISMA statement[J].Annals of Internal Medicine,2009.264-269.
  • 2Moher D,Cook D J,Eastwood S. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials:the QUOROM statement[J].The Lancet,1999.1896-1900.
  • 3Group M. Meta-Analysis of Observational studies in Epidemiology.A proposal for reporting[J].Journal of the American Medical Association,2000.2008-2012.
  • 4Sacks HS,Berrier J,Reitman D. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials[J].New England Journal of Medicine,1987.450-455.
  • 5Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses[J].European Journal of Epidemiology,2010.603-605.
  • 6Slim K,Nini E,Forestier D. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors):development and validation of a new instrument[J].Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery,2003.712-716.
  • 7Jadad AR,Moore RA,Carroll D. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials:is blinding necessary[J].Controlled Clinical Trials,1996.1-12.
  • 8Higgins J,Green S. Cochrane Collaboration:Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0[updated March 2011][M].John Wiley \& Sons Ltd and The Cochrane Collaboration,Chichester,2011.
  • 9Higgins JP,Altman DG,Gotzsche PC. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials[J].British Medical Journal,2011.d5928.
  • 10陈耀龙,李幼平,杜亮,王莉,文进,杨晓妍.医学研究中证据分级和推荐强度的演进[J].中国循证医学杂志,2008,8(2):127-133. 被引量:233

共引文献320

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