{"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。
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.
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.