Cord Blood Platelet-Rich Plasma in Cesarean Section Wound Management.

IF 1.6 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Obstetrics and Gynecology International Pub Date : 2024-12-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1155/ogi/4155779
Amornrat Thanachaiviwat, Sutham Suthaporn, Patana Teng-Umnuay
{"title":"Cord Blood Platelet-Rich Plasma in Cesarean Section Wound Management.","authors":"Amornrat Thanachaiviwat, Sutham Suthaporn, Patana Teng-Umnuay","doi":"10.1155/ogi/4155779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) promotes the wound-healing process and reduces pain. Cord blood platelet-rich plasma (CB-PRP), which can be easily collected from the umbilical cord and reapplied to a cesarean section wound, has been proposed to have similar effects as PRP. This paper hypothesizes that CB-PRB would provide beneficial effects in terms of wound healing and pain reduction in women undergoing cesarean section. This study is a randomized controlled trial involving 52 pregnant women who underwent cesarean sections. Participants were assigned to either the intervention group (<i>n</i> = 26) or the control group (<i>n</i> = 26) at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic of Police General Hospital. Cord blood PRP was applied to the subcutaneous layer and the surgical wound immediately following the cesarean section. The efficacy of wound healing was evaluated using the REEDA scale score on days 1 and 3 postoperatively, and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was assessed in the 8th week postoperation. The efficacy in reducing pain was measured using a Visual Analog Scale on days 1 and 3 postoperatively. The mean REEDA scale on day 1 (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 0.2561.5 ± 0.256 in the CB-PRP group and 2.5 ± 0.267 in the control group; <i>p</i>=0.009) and the mean VSS score at the 8th week (mean ± SD: 2.577 ± 2.003 in the CB-PRP group and 6.962 ± 2.441 in the control group; <i>p</i> < 0.001) were significantly lower in the CB-PRP group than those in the control group. However, there were no differences in Visual Analog Scale values between the two groups. The findings indicate that CB-PRP potentially promotes wound healing following cesarean sections but does not reduce pain. Further research is needed to confirm the beneficial effects of CB-PRP.</p>","PeriodicalId":19439,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and Gynecology International","volume":"2024 ","pages":"4155779"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11658848/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and Gynecology International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/ogi/4155779","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) promotes the wound-healing process and reduces pain. Cord blood platelet-rich plasma (CB-PRP), which can be easily collected from the umbilical cord and reapplied to a cesarean section wound, has been proposed to have similar effects as PRP. This paper hypothesizes that CB-PRB would provide beneficial effects in terms of wound healing and pain reduction in women undergoing cesarean section. This study is a randomized controlled trial involving 52 pregnant women who underwent cesarean sections. Participants were assigned to either the intervention group (n = 26) or the control group (n = 26) at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic of Police General Hospital. Cord blood PRP was applied to the subcutaneous layer and the surgical wound immediately following the cesarean section. The efficacy of wound healing was evaluated using the REEDA scale score on days 1 and 3 postoperatively, and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was assessed in the 8th week postoperation. The efficacy in reducing pain was measured using a Visual Analog Scale on days 1 and 3 postoperatively. The mean REEDA scale on day 1 (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 0.2561.5 ± 0.256 in the CB-PRP group and 2.5 ± 0.267 in the control group; p=0.009) and the mean VSS score at the 8th week (mean ± SD: 2.577 ± 2.003 in the CB-PRP group and 6.962 ± 2.441 in the control group; p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the CB-PRP group than those in the control group. However, there were no differences in Visual Analog Scale values between the two groups. The findings indicate that CB-PRP potentially promotes wound healing following cesarean sections but does not reduce pain. Further research is needed to confirm the beneficial effects of CB-PRP.

脐带血富血小板血浆在剖宫产术创面处理中的应用。
富血小板血浆(PRP)促进伤口愈合过程,减轻疼痛。脐带血富血小板血浆(CB-PRP)可以很容易地从脐带中收集并重新应用于剖宫产伤口,已被认为具有与PRP相似的效果。本文假设CB-PRB在剖宫产术中伤口愈合和疼痛减轻方面具有有益作用。本研究是一项随机对照试验,涉及52名接受剖宫产手术的孕妇。在警察总医院妇产科门诊,将参与者分为干预组(n = 26)和对照组(n = 26)。剖宫产后立即将脐带血PRP应用于皮下层和手术伤口。术后第1天、第3天采用REEDA量表评分评估创面愈合效果,第8周采用温哥华疤痕量表(Vancouver Scar scale, VSS)评估创面愈合效果。术后第1天和第3天采用视觉模拟量表测量疼痛减轻效果。第1天平均REEDA评分(平均±SD: CB-PRP组1.5±0.2561.5±0.256,对照组2.5±0.267;p=0.009)和第8周VSS平均评分(平均±SD: CB-PRP组为2.577±2.003,对照组为6.962±2.441;p < 0.001), CB-PRP组显著低于对照组。然而,两组之间的视觉模拟量表值没有差异。研究结果表明,CB-PRP可能促进剖宫产术后伤口愈合,但不能减轻疼痛。需要进一步的研究来证实CB-PRP的有益作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Obstetrics and Gynecology International
Obstetrics and Gynecology International OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Obstetrics and Gynecology International is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that aims to provide a forum for scientists and clinical professionals working in obstetrics and gynecology. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine and infertility, reproductive endocrinology, and sexual medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信