湿润烧伤膏与磺胺嘧啶霜在治疗深Ⅱ度烧伤中的系统评价  

Systematic reviews of MEBO and sulfadiazine cream in the treatment of deep second degree burns

作　　者：杨杰[1] 刘斌[2] 胡敬国[2] 李玲[2] 刘扬[2] 

机构地区：[1]成都大学附属医院胸心外科,四川成都610081 [2]遵义医学院研究生学院,贵州遵义563000

出　　处：《四川医学》2013年第3期322-323,共2页Sichuan Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的系统评价湿润烧伤膏与磺胺嘧啶霜治疗烧伤的疗效。方法通过Pubmed数据库、Embase数据库、Cochrane图书馆、Science Direct数据库和中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)检索至2012年7月,有关湿润烧伤膏与磺胺嘧啶霜治疗烧伤的随机对照临床试验纳入研究,对所选文献的方法学质量进行分析,提取资料,包括愈合天数,瘢痕形成,需植皮例数。用RevMan 4.2软件进行统计、描述各结果优势比,95%置信区间。结果 7篇文献符合纳入标准,包括806例烧伤患者。两者愈合天数情况WMD=-6.23,95%CI,[-6.79,-5.67],总体效应有统计学意义(P<0.01),两者瘢痕形成情况OR=0.16,95%CI,[0.12,0.22],总体效应有统计学意义(P<0.01),两者需要植皮病例情况OR=0.20,95%CI,[0.11,0.36],总体效应有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论烧伤外用湿润烧伤膏比磺胺嘧啶霜治疗烧伤疗效肯定。Objective To make the systematic review of the efficacy of MEBO for treating bums and sulfadiazine cream. Methods Randomized controlled trials in bums injurles patients receiving treatment of MEBO and sulfadiazine cream were searched from Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Science direct Controlled trial Registry, and China Biological Medicine database. The methodological quality of all eligible articles was independently assessed. The analysis of the available data using the Revman 4. 2 software were applied. Results 7 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 806 cases of burn patients. Healing the number of days,WMD = -6. 23,95% CI, [ -6.79, -5.67 ], the overall effect was statistically significant （ P 〈 0. 01 ）. Scarring OR = 0. 16, 95% CI, [ 0. 12,0. 22], the overall effect was statistically significant （P 〈 0. 01 ）. Graft cases, OR = 0. 20,95% CI [ 0. 11, 0. 36 ] , the overall effect was statistically significant （P 〈 0.01 ）. Conclusion The efficacy of MEBO in treating burns were more definitive,it could provide strong theoretical support for after clinical bm＇n for external use of MEBO.

关 键 词：烧伤 湿润烧伤膏 磺胺嘧啶霜 系统评价 

分 类 号：R644[医药卫生—外科学]