成人脊柱畸形手术中的伤口闭合和伤口敷料,来自 AO 脊柱术后管理监测。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Global Spine Journal Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-13 DOI:10.1177/21925682241262749
Shin Oe, Ganesh Swamy, Martin Gagliardi, Stephen J Lewis, So Kato, Christopher I Shaffrey, Lawrence G Lenke, Yukihiro Matsuyama
{"title":"成人脊柱畸形手术中的伤口闭合和伤口敷料,来自 AO 脊柱术后管理监测。","authors":"Shin Oe, Ganesh Swamy, Martin Gagliardi, Stephen J Lewis, So Kato, Christopher I Shaffrey, Lawrence G Lenke, Yukihiro Matsuyama","doi":"10.1177/21925682241262749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>An e-mail-based online survey for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeons.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Wound closure and dressing techniques may vary according to the discretion of the surgeon as well as geographical location. However, there are no reports on most common methods. The purpose of this study is to clarify the consensus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey was distributed via email to AO Spine members. Responses from 164 ASD surgeons were surveyed. The regions were divided into 5 regions: Europe and South Africa (ESA), North America (NA), Asia Pacific (AP), Latin America (LA), and Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Wound closure methods were evaluated by glue(G), staples(S), external non-absorbable sutures (ENS), tapes(T), and only subcuticular absorbable suture (SAS). Wound Dressings consisted of dry dressing (D), plastic occlusive dressing (PO), G, Dermabond Prineo (DP).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of respondents were 57 in ESA, 33 in NA, 36 in AP, 22 in LA, and 16 in MENA. S (36.4%) was the most used wound closure method. This was followed by ENS (26.2%), SAS (14.4%), G (11.8%), and T (11.3%). S use was highest in ESA (44.3%), NA (28.6%), AP (31.7%), and MENA (58.8%). D was used by 50% of surgeons postoperatively. AP were most likely to use PO (36%). 21% of NA used DP, while between 0%-9% of surgeons used it in the rest of the world.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wound closure and dressings methods differ in the region. There are no current guidelines with these choices. Future studies should seek to standardize these choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"152-160"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wound Closure and Wound Dressings in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery From the AO Spine Surveillance of Post-Operative Management.\",\"authors\":\"Shin Oe, Ganesh Swamy, Martin Gagliardi, Stephen J Lewis, So Kato, Christopher I Shaffrey, Lawrence G Lenke, Yukihiro Matsuyama\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21925682241262749\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>An e-mail-based online survey for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeons.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Wound closure and dressing techniques may vary according to the discretion of the surgeon as well as geographical location. However, there are no reports on most common methods. The purpose of this study is to clarify the consensus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online survey was distributed via email to AO Spine members. Responses from 164 ASD surgeons were surveyed. The regions were divided into 5 regions: Europe and South Africa (ESA), North America (NA), Asia Pacific (AP), Latin America (LA), and Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Wound closure methods were evaluated by glue(G), staples(S), external non-absorbable sutures (ENS), tapes(T), and only subcuticular absorbable suture (SAS). Wound Dressings consisted of dry dressing (D), plastic occlusive dressing (PO), G, Dermabond Prineo (DP).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of respondents were 57 in ESA, 33 in NA, 36 in AP, 22 in LA, and 16 in MENA. S (36.4%) was the most used wound closure method. This was followed by ENS (26.2%), SAS (14.4%), G (11.8%), and T (11.3%). S use was highest in ESA (44.3%), NA (28.6%), AP (31.7%), and MENA (58.8%). D was used by 50% of surgeons postoperatively. AP were most likely to use PO (36%). 21% of NA used DP, while between 0%-9% of surgeons used it in the rest of the world.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wound closure and dressings methods differ in the region. There are no current guidelines with these choices. Future studies should seek to standardize these choices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"152-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571451/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241262749\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241262749","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究设计:通过电子邮件对成人脊柱畸形(ASD)外科医生进行在线调查:伤口闭合和包扎技术可能因外科医生的判断和地理位置而异。然而,目前还没有关于最常用方法的报告。本研究的目的是澄清共识:方法:通过电子邮件向 AO Spine 会员分发了一份在线调查。共收到 164 位 ASD 外科医生的回复。地区分为 5 个区域:欧洲和南非 (ESA)、北美 (NA)、亚太地区 (AP)、拉丁美洲 (LA) 以及中东和北非 (MENA)。评估的伤口闭合方法包括胶水(G)、订书针(S)、外部不可吸收缝合线(ENS)、胶带(T)和仅皮下可吸收缝合线(SAS)。伤口敷料包括干性敷料(D)、塑料闭塞性敷料(PO)、G、Dermabond Prineo(DP):受访者人数分别为:欧空局 57 人、北非 33 人、亚太地区 36 人、洛杉矶 22 人、中东和北非 16 人。S(36.4%)是最常用的伤口闭合方法。其次是 ENS(26.2%)、SAS(14.4%)、G(11.8%)和 T(11.3%)。S的使用率最高的是ESA(44.3%)、NA(28.6%)、AP(31.7%)和MENA(58.8%)。50%的外科医生在术后使用D。亚太地区最有可能使用 PO(36%)。21%的北非外科医生使用DP,而在世界其他地区,0%-9%的外科医生使用DP:结论:不同地区的伤口闭合和包扎方法各不相同。结论:不同地区的伤口闭合和敷料方法各不相同,目前还没有关于这些选择的指南。未来的研究应寻求将这些选择标准化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Wound Closure and Wound Dressings in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery From the AO Spine Surveillance of Post-Operative Management.

Study design: An e-mail-based online survey for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeons.

Objective: Wound closure and dressing techniques may vary according to the discretion of the surgeon as well as geographical location. However, there are no reports on most common methods. The purpose of this study is to clarify the consensus.

Methods: An online survey was distributed via email to AO Spine members. Responses from 164 ASD surgeons were surveyed. The regions were divided into 5 regions: Europe and South Africa (ESA), North America (NA), Asia Pacific (AP), Latin America (LA), and Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Wound closure methods were evaluated by glue(G), staples(S), external non-absorbable sutures (ENS), tapes(T), and only subcuticular absorbable suture (SAS). Wound Dressings consisted of dry dressing (D), plastic occlusive dressing (PO), G, Dermabond Prineo (DP).

Results: The number of respondents were 57 in ESA, 33 in NA, 36 in AP, 22 in LA, and 16 in MENA. S (36.4%) was the most used wound closure method. This was followed by ENS (26.2%), SAS (14.4%), G (11.8%), and T (11.3%). S use was highest in ESA (44.3%), NA (28.6%), AP (31.7%), and MENA (58.8%). D was used by 50% of surgeons postoperatively. AP were most likely to use PO (36%). 21% of NA used DP, while between 0%-9% of surgeons used it in the rest of the world.

Conclusion: Wound closure and dressings methods differ in the region. There are no current guidelines with these choices. Future studies should seek to standardize these choices.

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
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
期刊最新文献
Are Randomized Trials Better? Comparison of Baseline Covariate Balance of a Propensity Score-Balanced Lumbar Spine IDE Trial and Comparable RCTs. Correlation Between Facet Tropism and Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament in the Cervical Spine. Frontline Voice: AO Spine Member Survey Regarding Spine Oncology Knowledge Generation and Translation Needs. Letter re: "Are Variable Screw Angle Change and Screw-To-Vertebral Body Ratio Associated with Radiographic Subsidence Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion?" Risk Factors Preventing Identification of the Microorganism Causing Vertebral Osteomyelitis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1