封閉式負壓引流聯合前列地爾治療糖尿病足潰瘍的臨床療效分析

吳繼紅 王海云 孔彩霞 齊秦 劉曉萍 韓曉麗 郝開花

[摘要] 目的 觀察封閉式負壓引流聯合前列地爾治療糖尿病足潰瘍的臨床療效。方法 隨機選擇2018年1月—2019年12月至該院進行糖尿病足潰瘍治療的患者100例進行臨床研究。使用隨機數字法將患者分為觀察組和對照組，各50例，所有患者均給予控制血糖和前列地爾治療。對照組患者創面給予常規換藥，觀察組患者給予封閉式負壓引流。比較兩組患者創面愈合時間、住院時間以及治療前后疼痛評分和潰瘍面積變化情況。比較兩組患者臨床療效。 結果觀察組患者創面愈合時間、住院時間均低于對照組，差異有統計學意義（t=3.637、4.000，P<0.05），兩組患者治療前VAS評分和潰瘍面積差異無統計學意義（P>0.05），治療后與該組治療前相比均明顯降低（P<0.05），但觀察組VAS評分和潰瘍面積治療后均低于對照組，差異有統計學意義（t=5.177、8.678，P<0.05）;觀察組治療總有效率為96.00%，明顯高于對照組84.00%，差異有統計學意義（χ2=4.000，P=0.046）。結論 封閉式負壓引流聯合前列地爾對于糖尿病足潰瘍具有很好的臨床療效，明顯縮短病程，減輕患者疼痛，縮小潰瘍面積，提高患者生活質量。

[關鍵詞] 封閉式負壓引流;前列地爾;糖尿病足;潰瘍

[中圖分類號] R4? ? ? ? ? [文獻標識碼] A? ? ? ? ? [文章編號] 1674-0742（2020）10（c）-0054-03

[Abstract] Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of closed negative pressure drainage combined with alprostadil in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Methods Randomly select 100 patients who were treated for diabetic foot ulcer in the hospital from January 2018 to December 2019 for clinical research. The patients were divided into observation group and control group by random number method， each with 50 cases. All patients were given blood glucose control and alprostadil treatment. Patients in the control group were given routine dressing changes on their wounds， and patients in the observation group were given closed negative pressure drainage. The wound healing time， hospitalization time， pain score and ulcer area changes before and after treatment were compared between the two groups. Compare the clinical efficacy of the two groups of patients. Results The wound healing time and hospitalization time of the observation group were lower than those of the control group，and the difference was statistically significant（t=3.637，4.000，P<0.05）. The VAS score and ulcer area of the two groups before treatment were not statistically significant difference（P>0.05）. After treatment， compared with the group before treatment， both were significantly reduced（P<0.05）， but the VAS score and ulcer area of the observation group after treatment were lower than those of the control group， and the difference was statistically significant （t=5.177，8.678，P<0.05）; the total effective rate of treatment in the observation group was 96.00%， which was significantly higher than that of the control group 84.00%，and the difference was statistically significant（χ2=4.000， P=0.046）. Conclusion Closed negative pressure drainage and alprostadil have a good clinical effect on diabetic foot ulcers， which can shorten the course of the disease， reduce the pain of patients， reduce the area of ulcers， and improve the quality of life of patients.

綜上所述，封閉式負壓引流聯合前列地爾對于糖尿病足潰瘍具有很好的臨床療效，能明顯縮短病程，減輕患者疼痛，縮小潰瘍面積，提高患者生活質量。

[參考文獻]

[1]? Tan L，Hou Z，Gao Y.Efficacy of combined treatment with vacuum sealing drainage and recombinant human epidermal growth factor forrefractory wounds in the extremities and its effect on serum levels of IL-6， TNF-α and IL-2[J].Exp Ther Med， 2018，1 5（1）：288-294.

[2]? 國際血管聯盟中國分會糖尿病足專業委員會.糖尿病足診治指南[J].介入放射學雜志，2013，22（9）：705-708.

[3]? 中華醫學會糖尿病學分會.中國2型糖尿病防治指南（2013年版）[J].中華糖尿病雜志，2014（7）：447-498.

[4]? 許樟榮，王玉珍.糖尿病足的綜合防治和分級管理[J].中國醫刊，2017，52（2）：11-14.

[5]? 周麗華，陳清華，陳宗存，等.自體富血小板凝膠聯合封閉式負壓引流術治療糖尿病足潰瘍的效果觀察[J].中國醫學前沿雜志：電子版，2017，9（6）：131-134.

[6]? 倪少俊，徐秋月，楊軍，等.含氧生理鹽水間斷沖洗聯合負壓封閉引流治療糖尿病肢體慢性潰瘍的效果觀察[J].海南醫學，2018，29（2）：190-192.

[7]? 童利偉，劉真，羅富瓊，等.持續封閉負壓吸引治療糖尿病足的療效觀察[J].西南軍醫，2017，19（6）：523-524.

[8]? 龔磊，黎濤，楊月蓮，等.前列地爾聯合VSD負壓吸引治療糖尿病足潰瘍療效分析[J].中國臨床新醫學，2017，10（12）：1197-1198.

[9]? 郭正祥，章伏生，王史輝，等.封閉式負壓引流聯合前列地爾治療糖尿病足潰瘍創面愈合的臨床療效觀察[J].中國現代醫生，2019，57（20）：100-103.

[10]? 弓軍勝，蘭麗珍.封閉式負壓引流聯合前列地爾治療糖尿病足潰瘍的臨床觀察[J].中西醫結合心腦血管病雜志，2019， 16（13）：1940-1942.

（收稿日期：2020-07-26）