热烧伤中的高压氧疗法(HBO2)再探。压力确实很重要。回顾。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-01
Christian Smolle, Daniel Auinger, Jörg Lindenmann, Josef Smolle, Freyja-Maria Smolle-Juettner, Lars-Peter Kamolz
{"title":"热烧伤中的高压氧疗法(HBO2)再探。压力确实很重要。回顾。","authors":"Christian Smolle, Daniel Auinger, Jörg Lindenmann, Josef Smolle, Freyja-Maria Smolle-Juettner, Lars-Peter Kamolz","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For over five decades, many experimental and clinical studies have shown predominantly positive but controversial results on the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO<sub>2</sub>) therapy in burns. The study aimed to define a common denominator or constellations, respectively, linked to the effects of HBO<sub>2</sub> in burns with a special focus on dosage parameters. Based on original work since 1965, species, number of individuals, type of study, percentage of total body surface area (TBSA), region, depth of burn, causative agent, interval between burn and first HBO2 session, pressure, duration of individual session, number of HBO<sub>2</sub> sessions per day, cumulative number of HBO<sub>2</sub> sessions and type of chamber were assessed. Out of 47 publications included, 32 were animal trials, four were trials in human volunteers, and 11 were clinical studies. They contained 94 experiments whose features were processed for statistical evaluation. 64 (67.4%) showed a positive outcome, 16 (17.9%) an ambiguous one, and 14 (14.7%) a negative outcome. The only factor independently influencing the results was pressure with ATA (atmospheres absolute) lower than 3 ATA being significantly associated with better outcomes (p=0.0005). There is a dire need for well-designed clinical studies in burn centers equipped with hyperbaric facilities to establish dedicated treatment protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":49396,"journal":{"name":"Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO<sub>2</sub>) therapy in thermal burn injury revisited. Pressure does matter. Review.\",\"authors\":\"Christian Smolle, Daniel Auinger, Jörg Lindenmann, Josef Smolle, Freyja-Maria Smolle-Juettner, Lars-Peter Kamolz\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For over five decades, many experimental and clinical studies have shown predominantly positive but controversial results on the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO<sub>2</sub>) therapy in burns. The study aimed to define a common denominator or constellations, respectively, linked to the effects of HBO<sub>2</sub> in burns with a special focus on dosage parameters. Based on original work since 1965, species, number of individuals, type of study, percentage of total body surface area (TBSA), region, depth of burn, causative agent, interval between burn and first HBO2 session, pressure, duration of individual session, number of HBO<sub>2</sub> sessions per day, cumulative number of HBO<sub>2</sub> sessions and type of chamber were assessed. Out of 47 publications included, 32 were animal trials, four were trials in human volunteers, and 11 were clinical studies. They contained 94 experiments whose features were processed for statistical evaluation. 64 (67.4%) showed a positive outcome, 16 (17.9%) an ambiguous one, and 14 (14.7%) a negative outcome. The only factor independently influencing the results was pressure with ATA (atmospheres absolute) lower than 3 ATA being significantly associated with better outcomes (p=0.0005). There is a dire need for well-designed clinical studies in burn centers equipped with hyperbaric facilities to establish dedicated treatment protocols.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

五十多年来,许多实验和临床研究表明,高压氧(HBO2)疗法对烧伤的疗效主要是积极的,但也存在争议。本研究旨在确定与 HBO2 治疗烧伤效果相关的共同点或星座,并特别关注剂量参数。根据 1965 年以来的原始研究成果,对物种、人数、研究类型、体表总面积(TBSA)百分比、区域、烧伤深度、致病因子、烧伤与首次 HBO2 治疗之间的间隔时间、压力、单次治疗持续时间、每天 HBO2 治疗次数、累计 HBO2 治疗次数和舱室类型进行了评估。在收录的 47 篇文献中,32 篇为动物试验,4 篇为人类志愿者试验,11 篇为临床研究。这些研究包含 94 项实验,对其特征进行了统计评估。64项(67.4%)实验结果呈阳性,16项(17.9%)实验结果不明确,14项(14.7%)实验结果呈阴性。唯一独立影响结果的因素是压力,ATA(绝对大气压)低于 3 ATA 与更好的结果显著相关(p=0.0005)。目前急需在配备高压氧设施的烧伤中心进行精心设计的临床研究,以制定专门的治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy in thermal burn injury revisited. Pressure does matter. Review.

For over five decades, many experimental and clinical studies have shown predominantly positive but controversial results on the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy in burns. The study aimed to define a common denominator or constellations, respectively, linked to the effects of HBO2 in burns with a special focus on dosage parameters. Based on original work since 1965, species, number of individuals, type of study, percentage of total body surface area (TBSA), region, depth of burn, causative agent, interval between burn and first HBO2 session, pressure, duration of individual session, number of HBO2 sessions per day, cumulative number of HBO2 sessions and type of chamber were assessed. Out of 47 publications included, 32 were animal trials, four were trials in human volunteers, and 11 were clinical studies. They contained 94 experiments whose features were processed for statistical evaluation. 64 (67.4%) showed a positive outcome, 16 (17.9%) an ambiguous one, and 14 (14.7%) a negative outcome. The only factor independently influencing the results was pressure with ATA (atmospheres absolute) lower than 3 ATA being significantly associated with better outcomes (p=0.0005). There is a dire need for well-designed clinical studies in burn centers equipped with hyperbaric facilities to establish dedicated treatment protocols.

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
Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine
Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine 医学-海洋与淡水生物学
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine Journal accepts manuscripts for publication that are related to the areas of diving research and physiology, hyperbaric medicine and oxygen therapy, submarine medicine, naval medicine and clinical research related to the above topics. To be considered for UHM scientific papers must deal with significant and new research in an area related to biological, physical and clinical phenomena related to the above environments.
期刊最新文献
Cardiovascular effects of breath-hold diving at altitude. Controlled CMS Data Demonstrates a Cost and Clinical Advantage for Hyperbaric Oxygen for Radiation Cystitis. Effect of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on diabetes-related oral complications. Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy in thermal burn injury revisited. Pressure does matter. Review. Inner ear decompression sickness after a routine dive and recompression chamber drill.
×
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