应用围手术期实时荧光成像实现高质量清创:一项随机对照试验。

IF 5.8 3区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Jui-Chen Hsu, Yi-Hung Chu, Yi-Chun Wu, Jung-Hsuan Chang, Ching-Uen Huang, Xin-Yi Lin, Yu-Fen Chiu, Fu-Yu Wang, Ka-Wai Tam, Shun-Cheng Chang
{"title":"应用围手术期实时荧光成像实现高质量清创:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Jui-Chen Hsu, Yi-Hung Chu, Yi-Chun Wu, Jung-Hsuan Chang, Ching-Uen Huang, Xin-Yi Lin, Yu-Fen Chiu, Fu-Yu Wang, Ka-Wai Tam, Shun-Cheng Chang","doi":"10.1177/21621918251359558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To investigate the effectiveness of real-time fluorescence imaging (RTFI)-assisted debridement in managing chronic wounds compared with standard surgical debridement. <b>Approach:</b> This study was a patient-blinded, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 17, 2021, to July 30, 2021, on patients with chronic wounds. Patients were randomized to an RTFI group (M group) or conventional group (C group). The primary outcomes were as follows: percentage of residual bacterial area (preoperative and postoperative), number of debridements, high-quality debridement ratio, operation duration, and wound healing duration. <b>Results:</b> A total of 100 patients were enrolled in both groups. No significant difference in the percentage of preoperative residual bacterial area or high-quality debridement ratio was seen. The M group underwent debridement an average of 2.6 times and had a significantly longer duration of operation (33.5 ± 12.7 min) than the C group (29.9 ± 10.4 min; <i>p</i> = 0.031). The postoperative residual bacterial area was significantly lower in the M than in the C group (6.83% ± 1.39% vs. 30.0% ± 12.37%, respectively; <i>p</i> < 0.001). The M group required significantly fewer wound healing days (49.2 ± 25.3 vs. 63.0 ± 27.9, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Secondary outcomes also demonstrated statistically significant differences in total hospitalized days (17.5 ± 9.3 vs. 21.5 ± 12.5, <i>p</i> < 0.01), days of antibiotic use (15.5 ± 8.7 vs. 18.7 ± 6.7, <i>p</i> < 0.01), and reinfection rates (4 of 100 vs. 22 of 100, <i>p</i> < 0.001). <b>Innovation:</b> RTFI can detect signals from normal skin components and bacterial metabolites. Therefore, interpretation of RTFI results should be correlated with the clinical condition. RTFI is associated with high-quality debridement. This technique can also be applied in targeted biopsy and in training young staff to mature debridement procedures. <b>Conclusion:</b> RTFI in debridement is associated with favorable clinical outcomes and may have a positive influence on chronic wound healing.</p>","PeriodicalId":7413,"journal":{"name":"Advances in wound care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of Perioperative Real-Time Fluorescence Imaging to Achieve High-Quality Debridement: A Randomized Control Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jui-Chen Hsu, Yi-Hung Chu, Yi-Chun Wu, Jung-Hsuan Chang, Ching-Uen Huang, Xin-Yi Lin, Yu-Fen Chiu, Fu-Yu Wang, Ka-Wai Tam, Shun-Cheng Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21621918251359558\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To investigate the effectiveness of real-time fluorescence imaging (RTFI)-assisted debridement in managing chronic wounds compared with standard surgical debridement. <b>Approach:</b> This study was a patient-blinded, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 17, 2021, to July 30, 2021, on patients with chronic wounds. Patients were randomized to an RTFI group (M group) or conventional group (C group). The primary outcomes were as follows: percentage of residual bacterial area (preoperative and postoperative), number of debridements, high-quality debridement ratio, operation duration, and wound healing duration. <b>Results:</b> A total of 100 patients were enrolled in both groups. No significant difference in the percentage of preoperative residual bacterial area or high-quality debridement ratio was seen. The M group underwent debridement an average of 2.6 times and had a significantly longer duration of operation (33.5 ± 12.7 min) than the C group (29.9 ± 10.4 min; <i>p</i> = 0.031). The postoperative residual bacterial area was significantly lower in the M than in the C group (6.83% ± 1.39% vs. 30.0% ± 12.37%, respectively; <i>p</i> < 0.001). The M group required significantly fewer wound healing days (49.2 ± 25.3 vs. 63.0 ± 27.9, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Secondary outcomes also demonstrated statistically significant differences in total hospitalized days (17.5 ± 9.3 vs. 21.5 ± 12.5, <i>p</i> < 0.01), days of antibiotic use (15.5 ± 8.7 vs. 18.7 ± 6.7, <i>p</i> < 0.01), and reinfection rates (4 of 100 vs. 22 of 100, <i>p</i> < 0.001). <b>Innovation:</b> RTFI can detect signals from normal skin components and bacterial metabolites. Therefore, interpretation of RTFI results should be correlated with the clinical condition. RTFI is associated with high-quality debridement. This technique can also be applied in targeted biopsy and in training young staff to mature debridement procedures. <b>Conclusion:</b> RTFI in debridement is associated with favorable clinical outcomes and may have a positive influence on chronic wound healing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7413,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in wound care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in wound care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21621918251359558\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in wound care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21621918251359558","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨实时荧光成像(RTFI)辅助清创治疗慢性创面的效果与标准手术清创的比较。方法:本研究是一项患者盲法随机临床试验,于2021年2月17日至2021年7月30日对慢性伤口患者进行研究。患者随机分为RTFI组(M组)和常规组(C组)。主要观察指标为:残余细菌面积百分比(术前、术后)、清创次数、高质量清创比例、手术时间、伤口愈合时间。结果:两组共入组患者100例。术前残余细菌面积百分比和高质量清创比例差异无统计学意义。M组平均清创2.6次,手术时间(33.5±12.7 min)明显长于C组(29.9±10.4 min);P = 0.031)。M组术后残余细菌面积明显低于C组(6.83%±1.39% vs. 30.0%±12.37%);P < 0.001)。M组创面愈合天数明显少于对照组(49.2±25.3 vs. 63.0±27.9,p < 0.001)。次要结局在总住院天数(17.5±9.3比21.5±12.5,p < 0.01)、抗生素使用天数(15.5±8.7比18.7±6.7,p < 0.01)和再感染率(100人中4人比100人中22人,p < 0.001)方面也有统计学意义。创新:RTFI可以检测正常皮肤成分和细菌代谢物的信号。因此,对RTFI结果的解释应与临床情况相关。RTFI与高质量清创相关。这项技术也可以应用于有针对性的活检和培训年轻员工成熟的清创程序。结论:RTFI清创具有良好的临床效果,可能对慢性创面愈合有积极影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Application of Perioperative Real-Time Fluorescence Imaging to Achieve High-Quality Debridement: A Randomized Control Trial.

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of real-time fluorescence imaging (RTFI)-assisted debridement in managing chronic wounds compared with standard surgical debridement. Approach: This study was a patient-blinded, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 17, 2021, to July 30, 2021, on patients with chronic wounds. Patients were randomized to an RTFI group (M group) or conventional group (C group). The primary outcomes were as follows: percentage of residual bacterial area (preoperative and postoperative), number of debridements, high-quality debridement ratio, operation duration, and wound healing duration. Results: A total of 100 patients were enrolled in both groups. No significant difference in the percentage of preoperative residual bacterial area or high-quality debridement ratio was seen. The M group underwent debridement an average of 2.6 times and had a significantly longer duration of operation (33.5 ± 12.7 min) than the C group (29.9 ± 10.4 min; p = 0.031). The postoperative residual bacterial area was significantly lower in the M than in the C group (6.83% ± 1.39% vs. 30.0% ± 12.37%, respectively; p < 0.001). The M group required significantly fewer wound healing days (49.2 ± 25.3 vs. 63.0 ± 27.9, p < 0.001). Secondary outcomes also demonstrated statistically significant differences in total hospitalized days (17.5 ± 9.3 vs. 21.5 ± 12.5, p < 0.01), days of antibiotic use (15.5 ± 8.7 vs. 18.7 ± 6.7, p < 0.01), and reinfection rates (4 of 100 vs. 22 of 100, p < 0.001). Innovation: RTFI can detect signals from normal skin components and bacterial metabolites. Therefore, interpretation of RTFI results should be correlated with the clinical condition. RTFI is associated with high-quality debridement. This technique can also be applied in targeted biopsy and in training young staff to mature debridement procedures. Conclusion: RTFI in debridement is associated with favorable clinical outcomes and may have a positive influence on chronic wound healing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in wound care
Advances in wound care Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
4.10%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Advances in Wound Care rapidly shares research from bench to bedside, with wound care applications for burns, major trauma, blast injuries, surgery, and diabetic ulcers. The Journal provides a critical, peer-reviewed forum for the field of tissue injury and repair, with an emphasis on acute and chronic wounds. Advances in Wound Care explores novel research approaches and practices to deliver the latest scientific discoveries and developments. Advances in Wound Care coverage includes: Skin bioengineering, Skin and tissue regeneration, Acute, chronic, and complex wounds, Dressings, Anti-scar strategies, Inflammation, Burns and healing, Biofilm, Oxygen and angiogenesis, Critical limb ischemia, Military wound care, New devices and technologies.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信