两种不同负压引流敷料在四肢植皮术的疗效比较

目的：比较两种不同伤口负压敷料在四肢植皮术中的疗效。方法回顾分析对2011年1月～2014年2月四肢创面行植皮治疗的70例患者，32例应用外置吸盘封闭式负压敷料固定皮片（ A组），38例应用内置吸管封闭式负压引流敷料（B组）。两组患者均于术后7d摘除敷料，对两组病人首次植皮成活率情况、平均手术时间、创面完全愈合时间、平均住院时间进行统计学分析，采用t检验和卡方检验，对此两种方法进行评价。结果两组患者均有效达到创面植皮覆盖效果，无感染及不愈合情况出现。 A组与B组在首次植皮成活率、手术时间上对比有显著统计学差异性（P＜0.05），在创面完全愈合时间及平均住院时间方面两者无明显统计学差异（ P＞0.05）。结论外置吸盘封闭式负压敷料与内置吸管封闭式负压引流敷料均可用于植皮，外置吸盘封闭式负压敷料在首次植皮成活率及手术时间上优于内置吸管封闭式负压引流敷料，我们可以根据病人的不同情况选择这两种方法。

Efficacy comparison of two different dressing for vacuum drainage in limb skin grafting

Objective To observe the effect of two different kinds of dressing for vacuum drainage in limb skin grafting.Methods In this study,70 patients with skin and soft tissue defect were treated with skin grafting from Jan.2011 to Feb.2014.Among them,32 patients were treated with negative pressure drainage dressing (Group A) and the other 38 patients were treated with vacuum sealing drainage (Group B).The dressings were removed after 1 week of treatment .The survival rate of skin graft ,operation time ,wound healing time and the average hospi-talization time were recorded and analyzed and the therapeutic effects were compared by T test and χ2 test.Results The survival rate of skin graft in Group A was significantly higher than that of Group B (P<0.05),and the opera-tion time in Group A was significantly shorter than that of Group B (P<0.05) while the wound healing time and the time in hospital had no statistical differences (P>0.05).Conclusion Both kinds of dressing have good effect on the coverage of skin grafting .Compared with vacuum sealing drainage dressing ,negative pressure drainage dressing has the advantage of improving the survival rate of thin skin graft and reducing the operation time .We can choose the dressing based on the condition of the patient .