封闭式负压引流和传统切开引流在颌面间隙感染中的效果比较  

Comparison of the effects of closed negative pressure drainage and traditional open drainage in maxillofacial space infection

作　　者：金泽高 程杰 李艳芳 王密腊 JIN Ze-gao;CHENG Jie;LI Yan-fang;WANG Mi-la(Department of Stomatology,Jiaozuo Coal Industry(Group)Co.,Ltd.Central Hospital,Jiaozuo 454000,Henan Province,China)

机构地区：[1]焦作煤业(集团)有限责任公司中央医院口腔科,河南焦作454000

出　　处：《中国口腔颌面外科杂志》2021年第4期358-361,共4页China Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

摘　　要：目的:探讨封闭式负压引流和传统切开引流在治疗颌面间隙感染中的效果差异。方法:选择2017年2月—2019年8月收治的颌面部间隙感染患者139例,采用随机区组方式分为负压组69例(封闭式负压引流)和传统组70例(传统切开引流);比较2组的视觉模拟疼痛量表(VAS)评分、血清降钙素原(PCT)、C反应蛋白(CRP)变化,治疗效果、换药次数、抗生素使用时间、肉芽组织生长时间差异。采用SPSS 21.0软件包对数据进行统计学处理。结果:治疗前,负压组和传统组患者的VAS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗3、7 d后,负压组患者的VAS评分显著低于传统组(P<0.05);治疗前,负压组和传统组患者的血清CRP、PCT水平差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗3、7 d后,负压组患者的血清CRP、PCT水平均显著低于传统组(P<0.05);负压组患者的换药次数、抗生素使用时间、肉芽组织生长时间均低于传统组患者,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗7 d后,负压组的治愈率为60.87%,显著高于传统组的44.29%(P<0.05)。结论:封闭式负压引流较传统切开引流治疗颌面间隙感染的效果更加显著。PURPOSE:To investigate the difference between closed negative pressure drainage and traditional open drainage in the treatment of maxillofacial space infection.METHODS:A total of 139 patients with maxillofacial space infection treated from February 2017 to August 2019 were selected and randomly divided into negative pressure group(closed negative pressure drainage,n=69)and traditional group(traditional incision drainage,n=70).Differences in visual analog scale(VAS)score,changes in serum procalcitonin(PCT),C-reactive protein(CRP),treatment effect,number of dressing changes,antibiotic use time,and granulation tissue growth time were compared between the two groups using SPSS 21.0 software package.RESULTS:Before treatment,there was no significant difference in VAS scores between the two groups(P>0.05).After 3 and 7 days of treatment,the VAS scores of the negative pressure group were significantly lower than the traditional group(P<0.05).Before treatment,there was no significant difference in serum CRP and PCT levels between the two groups(P>0.05).After 3 days and 7 days of treatment,the serum CRP and PCT levels of the negative pressure group were significantly lower than those of the traditional group(P<0.05);the number of dressing changes,antibiotic use time,and granulation tissue growth time of the negative pressure group were significantly lower than those of the traditional group(P<0.05);the curative rate and effective rate were 60.87%,37.68%in the negative pressure group,and 44.29%,51.43%in the traditional group.CONCLUSIONS:Closed negative pressure drainage is more effective than traditional incision drainage in treating maxillofacial space infection.

关 键 词：封闭式负压引流 切开引流 颌面部间隙感染 

分 类 号：R782.3[医药卫生—口腔医学]