3种处理方式对具有感染高危因素剖宫产切口愈合的影响  

Effect of three methods on cure of cesarean incision on patients with highly infective risk factors

作　　者：吴林珍[1] 孙亚青[1] 胡志英[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江省中西医结合医院妇产科,浙江杭州310003

出　　处：《中华医院感染学杂志》2011年第7期1317-1318,共2页Chinese Journal of Nosocomiology

摘　　要：目的探讨3种切口缝合前处理方式对具有感染高危因素剖宫产手术切口愈合的影响。方法回顾性分析2005年1月-2009年12月在医院行剖宫产手术中具有切口感染高危因素的病例资料共603例,按皮肤切口缝合前不同处理方式分为3组,A组:切口常规缝合组(221例),B组:切口放置皮片引流组(197例),C组:切口放置负压引流管组(185例);观察3组术后出现切口感染情况,应用统计学方法比较3组之间的差异。结果 A组切口感染24例,术后感染率10.86%,B组切口感染13例,术后感染率6.60%,C组切口感染3例,术后感染率1.62%;3组术后切口感染率两两比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论切口放置负压引流管能预防具有感染高危因素的剖宫产术后切口感染,疗效满意,能显著降低切口感染率。OBJECTIVE To discuss the effect of disposal methods on the cure of cesarean incision on the patients with high infective risk factor before 3 methods of cesarean incision.METHODS Retrospective analysis was performed to 603 patients who underwent cesarean with high risk of infection in hospital during Jan.2005~Dec.2009.They were divided into three groups according to the different methods used before suturing the skin.Group A： conventional suture（221cases）.Group B： putting a flap drainage before suture（197cases）.Group C： putting a negative pressure drainage before suture（185cases）.The postoperative infection rates of the three groups were compared by using statistic methods.RESULTS Totally 24 cases（10.86%） got incision infection in group A;13 cases（6.60%） got incision infection in group B;3 cases got incision infection in group C,the rate was 1.62%.There was statistic significance between group A and B（P0.05）,group B and C（P0.05）,group A and C（P0.05）.CONCLUSION To put negative pressure drainage can prevent the incision infection on the cesarean patients with high infective risks,and the effect is obvious and can significantly reduce the incision infection rate.

关 键 词：剖宫产 切口感染 负压引流 

分 类 号：R181.32[医药卫生—流行病学]