切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版) ›› 2025, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (02) : 148 -154. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-9450.2025.02.011

论著

硅橡胶封闭式负压引流系统对猪急性皮肤损伤的疗效观察
翟延荣1, 朱亚萍1, 张秀珍1, 张雨凡1, 钟晓娟1, 鲁香月1, 赵嵌嵌1, 邹俊2,()   
  1. 1. 215128 苏州市吴中人民医院创面修复科
    2. 215006 苏州大学附属第一医院骨科
  • 收稿日期:2024-09-25 出版日期:2025-04-01
  • 通信作者: 邹俊
  • 基金资助:
    江苏省苏州市科技计划项目(SKY2022033)江苏省苏州市吴中区科技计划项目

Observation on the effect of a silicone rubber vacuum sealing drainage system in the treatment of acute skin defect in pigs

Yanrong Zhai1, Yaping Zhu1, Xiuzhen Zhang1, Yufan Zhang1, Xiaojuan Zhong1, Xiangyue Lu1, Qianqian Zhao1, Jun Zou2,()   

  1. 1. Department of Wound Repair,People's Hospital of Wuzhong,Suzhou 215128,China
    2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery,the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University,Suzhou 215006,China
  • Received:2024-09-25 Published:2025-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Jun Zou
引用本文:

翟延荣, 朱亚萍, 张秀珍, 张雨凡, 钟晓娟, 鲁香月, 赵嵌嵌, 邹俊. 硅橡胶封闭式负压引流系统对猪急性皮肤损伤的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2025, 20(02): 148-154.

Yanrong Zhai, Yaping Zhu, Xiuzhen Zhang, Yufan Zhang, Xiaojuan Zhong, Xiangyue Lu, Qianqian Zhao, Jun Zou. Observation on the effect of a silicone rubber vacuum sealing drainage system in the treatment of acute skin defect in pigs[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Injury Repair and Wound Healing(Electronic Edition), 2025, 20(02): 148-154.

目的

比较硅橡胶封闭式负压引流系统与传统聚氨酯负压封闭引流系统治疗猪急性皮肤损伤的疗效。

方法

选择5 只实验用巴马小型猪,建立猪急性皮肤损伤模型。 在猪背部制造4个急性皮肤损伤创面,创面1、创面3 为长7 cm 深达肌层的长切口并缝合(缝合伤创面),创面2、创面4 为4 cm×4 cm 全层皮肤缺损创面(切割伤创面)。 同一实验动物创面1、创面2 使用硅橡胶封闭式负压引流系统治疗(实验组),创面3、创面4 使用聚氨酯负压封闭引流系统治疗(对照组)。 每5 天更换1 次敷料。 于治疗第10 天观察创面愈合情况,测量创面面积和创面体积,取创面肉芽组织行HE 染色、Masson 染色及CD31 免疫组化染色,比较2 组创面愈合率、创面与敷料黏连和出血情况,以及血管新生和胶原形成情况。

结果

缝合伤创面在治疗第5 天表皮已愈合,治疗第10 天HE 染色及Masson染色提示实验组创面两侧胶原纤维连接较对照组更明显。 切割伤创面治疗第10 天,2 组均可见创面缩小,2 组创面面积缩小率差异无统计学意义(41.13%±12.15%比34.14%±8.24%,t=-1.225,P=0.288),但实验组创面体积缩小更明显(72.47%±8.25% 比51.12%±9.39%,t=5.061,P=0.007);CD31免疫组化染色及Masson 染色提示2 组创面均可见毛细血管增生及胶原形成,实验组CD31 平均光密度值(1.00±0.05 比0.57±0.04,t=-19.806,P<0.001)及Masson 染色胶原容积分数(40.53%±10.71% 比24.94%±7.68%,t=-3.154,P=0.034)均高于对照组。 切割伤创面治疗第5 天,更换敷料时2 组均无创面与敷料黏连情况;治疗第10 天,揭除敷料时实验组未发生创面与敷料黏连情况,对照组创面与敷料发生明显黏连,且伴有创面出血(P<0.05)。

结论

硅橡胶封闭式负压引流系统应用于猪急性全层皮肤缺损,可加快创面血管化及胶原形成,促进创面愈合,且减少更换敷料时创面与敷料黏连。

Objective

To compare the effect of silicone rubber vacuum sealing drainage system and traditional polyurethane vacuum sealing drainage system in treating acute skin defect in pigs.

Methods

Five Bama miniature pigs were selected to establish an acute skin injury model in pigs.Four wounds were constructed on the backs of the experimental Bama miniature pigs.The No.1 and No.3 wounds were sutured injury with a length of 7 cm and the deep from epidermis to the muscle layer (sutured wounds), while the NO.2 and NO.4 wounds were cutting injury with 4 cm×4 cm full-thickness skin defect (incised wounds).The NO.1 and NO.2 wounds were treated with silicone rubber vacuum sealing drainage system (experimental group), while the NO.3 and NO.4 wounds were treated with polyurethane vacuum sealing drainage system(control group).The dressings were changed every 5 days.On day 10 of the treatment, wound healing was assessed by measuring wound area and volume, the wounds were measured to compare the wound healing rate, adhesion and bleeding between the wound and dressing, and the angiogenesis and collagen formation were observed by hematoxylin-eosin staining, Masson staining, and CD31 immunohistochemical staining.

Results

The epidermis of suture injury wounds had healed on day 5 of the treatment both in experimental group and control group, but the results of hematoxylin-eosin staining and Masson staining showed that more collagen fiber connections between the two sides of the wounds was observed in experimental group.On day 10 of the treatment, the wound areas of cutting injury in both groups decreased, there was no significant difference between the two groups (41.13%±12.15% vs 34.14%±8.24%, t=-1.225, P=0.288), while the wound volume reduction rate in experimental group was significantly higher than that in control group(72.47%±8.25% vs 51.12%±9.39%, t=5.061, P=0.007).Capillary hyperplasia and collagen formation were both observed by CD31 immunohistochemical staining and Masson staining in the two groups, while the average optical density value of CD31 (1.00±0.05 vs 0.57±0.04, t=-19.806, P<0.001) and collagen volume fraction of Masson staining (40.53%±10.71% vs 24.94%±7.68%, t=-3.154, P= 0.034) in experimental group were higher than that in control group.For suture injury,when changing the dressings on day 5, there was no adhesions in either group.When changing the dressings on day 10, there was no adhesion and bleeding in experimental group, while there were obvious adhesion and bleeding in control group(P<0.05).

Conclusion

The silicone rubber vacuum sealing drainage system used in acute fullthickness skin defect in pigs can accelerate the vascularization and collagen formation,promote wound healing, and reduce dressing adhesion during dressing changes.

图1 动物造模示意图。 A 示创面1、创面3 为缝合伤创面,创面2、创面4 为切割伤创面;B 示创面1、创面2 使用硅橡胶封闭式负压引流系统治疗,创面3、创面4 使用聚氨酯负压封闭引流系统治疗
表1 实验组与对照组切割伤创面愈合情况比较
图2 治疗第10 天切割伤创面与负压敷料黏连情况。 A 示对照组聚氨酯敷料与创面明显黏连且伴有出血;B 示实验组硅橡胶敷料与创面无明显黏连,创面无出血
图3 治疗第10 天缝合伤创面愈合情况。 A 示大体观察提示表皮愈合;B、C 示HE 染色(×100),B 为实验组,C 为对照组;D、E 示Masson 染色(×400),D 为实验组,E 为对照组。 实验组创面两侧胶原连接较对照组明显
图4 治疗第10 天切割伤创面CD31 免疫组化染色及Masson 染色。 A 示对照组Masson 染色(×200);B 示实验组Masson 染色(×200);C 示对照组CD31 免疫组化染色(×400);D 示实验组CD31 免疫组化染色(×400)。 实验组新生血管及胶原纤维均多于对照组
[1]
周琴,李双双,王青,等.集束化护理干预对烧伤科住院患者负压封闭引流治疗中引流不畅的影响[J].中华烧伤杂志,2019,35(2):148-152.
[2]
朱婷婷,曹冠柏,甘曦.负压伤口疗法在临床的应用进展[J].中国医学创新,2023,20(19):174-178.
[3]
吕国忠,杨敏烈.规范应用负压伤口疗法提高创面修复水平[J].中华烧伤杂志,2020,36(7):523-527.
[4]
Anagnostakos K, Thiery A, Sahan I.Retained negative pressure wound therapy foams as a cause of infection persistence[J].Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle),2021,10(12):699-710.
[5]
Eriksson E,Liu PY, Schultz GS, et al.Chronic wounds:treatment consensus[J].Wound Repair Regen,2022,30(2):156-171.
[6]
翟延荣,朱亚萍,张秀珍,等.比较新型硅橡胶负压冲洗引流系统与聚氨酯负压引流系统体外防堵塞性能的观察[J].中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版),2023,18(2):116-122.
[7]
Shi WL, Zhao J, Yuan R, et al.Combination of ligusticum chuanxiong and radix paeonia promotes angiogenesis in ischemic myocardium through notch signalling and mobilization of stem cells [ J].Evid Based Complement Alternat Med, 2019,2019:7912402.
[8]
Baidoo N, Sanger GJ, Belai A.Histochemical and biochemical analysis of collagen content in formalin-fixed, paraffin embedded colonic samples[J].MethodsX,2023,11:102416.
[9]
Quacinella MA,Yong TM, Obremskey WT, et al.Negative pressure wound therapy:where are we in 2022? [J].OTA Int,2023,6(4 Suppl):e247.
[10]
Biermann N, Geissler EK, Brix E, et al.Pressure distribution and flow characteristics during negative pressure wound therapy[J].J Tissue Viability,2020,29(1):32-36.
[11]
季超,肖仕初.负压伤口疗法在创面治疗中的临床应用及其相关研究进展[J].中华烧伤与创面修复杂志,2022,38(6):585-589.
[12]
黄振, 王朋, 潘珍乙,等.聚乙烯醇和聚氨酯负压材料在Ⅲ度烧伤切痂创面应用的前瞻性随机对照试验[J].中华烧伤杂志,2020,36(9):813-820.
[13]
李青,张泰安,孟超,等.负压封闭引流技术致骶尾部压疮创面异物残留1 例报告[J].中国烧伤创疡杂志,2018,30(6):392-395.
[14]
Giri SK, Jain M, Khan S, et al.Adherent polyurethane foam following VAC dressing:a rare complication[J].J Orthop Case Rep,2023,13(9):67-70.
[15]
Téot L, Boissiere F, Fluieraru S.Novel foam dressing using negative pressure wound therapy with instillation to remove thick exudate[J].Int Wound J,2017,14(5):842-848.
[16]
刘亦凡,江兆奇,黄瑶,等.制备新型负压材料以构建大鼠全层皮肤缺损创面新生基质的可行性研究[J].中华烧伤与创面修复杂志,2022,38(7):650-660.
[17]
Baek W, Lee N, Han EJ, et al.A prospective randomized study:the usefulness and efficacy of negative pressure wound therapy with lipidocolloid polyester mesh compared to traditional negative pressure wound therapy for treatment of pressure ulcers[J].Pharmaceutics,2020,12(9):813.
[18]
Birke-Sorensen H,Malmsjo M,Rome P, et al.Evidence-based recommendations for negative pressure wound therapy:treatment variables (pressure levels, wound filler and contact layer)-Steps towards an international consensus[J].J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg,2011,64 Suppl:S1-S16.
[19]
田由京,石书萍,吴幸.无机纳米填料对植入硅橡胶生物相容性的影响[J].中国组织工程研究,2022,26(28):4581-4586.
[20]
Mu M, Liu S, DeFlorio W, et al.Influence of surface roughness,nanostructure, and wetting on bacterial adhesion[J].Langmuir,2023,39(15):5426-5439.
[1] 翟延荣, 朱亚萍, 张秀珍, 钟晓娟, 鲁香月, 张雨凡, 陆树良. 比较新型硅橡胶负压冲洗引流系统与聚氨酯负压引流系统体外防堵塞性能的观察[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(02): 116-122.
[2] 王铄链, 刘毅, 胡智瀚. 负压伤口疗法的作用、机制及其在糖尿病足临床治疗中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(01): 69-72.
[3] 徐庆连. 下肢严重车祸伤创面修复的经验、教训[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(01): 92-92.
[4] 李善友, 郝岱峰, 冯光, 李涛. 富血小板血浆在开胸术后纵膈感染治疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(05): 426-429.
[5] 陈泽群, 褚万立, 申传安, 祝红娟, 叶祥柏, 王星童, 赵帆, 张路, 宋垚垚. 坏死性软组织感染的临床特征及应用综合序贯诊疗策略的临床效果[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(04): 300-307.
[6] 盖晨阳, 张庆富. 负压封闭引流技术在创面治疗中的应用[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(03): 265-268.
[7] 张丕红, 彭映华. 2022年闭合切口负压治疗用于切口和周围软组织管理的专家共识解读[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(03): 185-190.
[8] 陆晓蔚, 胡亮, 肖贵喜, 吕庆兵, 王晶晶. 自体真皮移植联合负压封闭引流修复胫骨前区骨外露创面的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(01): 54-59.
[9] 地里夏提·库尔班, 陈召, 刘小龙. 供氧条件下负压封闭引流联合自体皮移植治疗难愈性糖尿病足溃疡的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(01): 25-31.
[10] 迟宏羽, 阿力亚·阿布都拉, 董祥林. 92例慢性皮肤溃疡患者的临床特征及影响治疗效果的因素分析[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(01): 11-17.
[11] 张梦思, 麻艺群, 付晋凤, 朱辉, 袁子萱. 微动力负压技术用于儿童四肢及躯干创面植皮术中的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2021, 16(05): 398-405.
[12] 朱喆辰, 史京萍, 王鸣, 姚刚, 阮姝婕. 负压封闭引流联合局部浸润麻醉下清创并手术缝合修复胸部正中切口愈合不良的临床应用[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2021, 16(04): 316-321.
[13] 韩志新, 杜卫祺, 牛大伟, 樊昌伟, 李振超, 狄海萍. 反鼓式皮片移植联合负压封闭引流治疗大面积皮肤撕脱伤[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2021, 16(03): 251-256.
[14] 张佳园, 魏凌飞, 刘晶, 邬春兰, 叶丽娟, 于德栋. 新型硅橡胶印模消毒流程对模型精度的影响[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 285-291.
[15] 方道成, 陈立新, 胡媛媛. 输尿管支架结壳的相关研究进展[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 402-405.
阅读次数
全文


摘要