MEBO與EGF在自體微粒皮種植修復(fù)肉芽創(chuàng)面中的臨床療效比較

摘要： 目的比較濕潤(rùn)燒傷膏(MEBO)、表皮細(xì)胞生長(zhǎng)因子(EGF)對(duì)自體微粒皮種植修復(fù)肉芽創(chuàng)面的臨床療效。方法選取中老年糖尿病、癱瘓、嚴(yán)重全身營(yíng)養(yǎng)不良的38例患者,其肉芽創(chuàng)面面積大于5 cm~2,按取皮面積:創(chuàng)面面積=1:20～30的比例種植自體微粒皮,將38例患者隨機(jī)分為兩組,治療組15例(MEBO組),對(duì)照組23例(EGF組),分別用MEBO和EGF換藥治療至創(chuàng)面愈合,觀察創(chuàng)面皮島修復(fù)情況及愈合時(shí)間。結(jié)果肉芽創(chuàng)面經(jīng)自體微粒皮種植術(shù)治療后,應(yīng)用MEBO和EGF治療都能使其愈合,但治療組(MEBO組)的創(chuàng)面愈合率高于對(duì)照組(EGF組);MEBO組創(chuàng)面生長(zhǎng)出皮島以及愈合所需時(shí)間較EGF'組明顯縮短(P<0.01)。結(jié)論肉芽創(chuàng)面經(jīng)自體微粒皮種植術(shù)治療后,應(yīng)用MEBO治療較EGF更能有效地促進(jìn)創(chuàng)面修復(fù)。
Objective To compare the clinical therapeutic efficacy between MEBO Ointment and EGF(Epidermal Growth Factor) used on granulated wounds after autologous micro-skin implantation.Methods 38 middle- & elderaged cases diagnosed with diabetes,paralysis and severe pantatrophia in clinics were enrolled into the study.Of those diagnosed, the size of granulated wounds was larger than 5 cm~2.The surface area ratio of implanted micro-skin to granulated wound was 1 to 20～30.38 cases were randomly divided into a treatment group(N = 15),to be given MEBO Ointment, and a control group(N = 23),to be given EGF.The dressing change with MEBO Ointment and EGF respectively was performed until the closure of the granulated wound.Growth of skin islands and healing time were observed.Results The granulated wounds,after being given autologous micro-skin implantation,could be healed by the action of MEBO Ointment or EGF.However,the healing rate in the treatment group was higher than that in the control group,and the time for the growth of skin islands and wound healing in the treatment group was apparently shorter than that in the control group(P < 0.01).Conclusion MEBO Ointment is superior to EGF in effectively promoting the healing of granulated wounds after being given autologous micro-skin implantation.