Closed Negative Pressure Drainage(VSD)in The Treatment Of Fractures Of Postoperative Infection:Observation Of Clinical Efficacy

Objective:Through the comparative analysis of closed negative pressure drainage (VSD) and traditional and persistent lavage in the treatment of fracture of postoperative infection in clinical efficacy, of closed negative pressure drainage (VSD) treatment effect. For cl inical treatment of postoperative infection of fracture bone to provide reierence.Methods: On2009to2011in the Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu University of Tradi t ional Chinese Medicine Department of Orthopaedics and Orthopaedic Hospital of Sichuan Province fractures of postoperative infection in32patients were retrospectively analyzed.Ising traditional and persistent lavage in15patients, with traditional treatment group (group A), using the closed negative pressure drainage (VSD) in17patients, set to VSD treatment group (B group). Through observation, all the patients were followed up for6months to10months, mean S months. The two groups of treatment: was observed the time of infection control, patients during the treatment of pain, hospitaiization time and other indicators, and follow-up records of two groups of treatment clinical curai ive effect. The observation results using SPSS17.0software package was used for statistical analysis, compared with two group of treatment methods for clinical effect. Results: Two groups of treatment without death, amputation case, to observe and record the time of infection control, patients during the treatment of pain, hospitalization time and other data, using SPSS17.0software package was used for statistical analysis.Infection control time comparison, vacuum sealing drainage for the treatment of group mean11.4±2.4days; and persistent lavage treatment group mean21.1±2.5days, both have significant, difference, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). McGill pain score comparison, vacuum sealing drainage therapy group is4.1±1.40, and persistent lavage therapy group is5.9+1.30, McGill pain score between two groups had significant difference, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Hospitalization time, vacuum sealing drainage therapy group is29.12+4.51, traditional and persistent lavage therapy group is35.20+2.88days, has significant difference, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Based on the comparison of the overall effect, seen in the total efficiency of closed negative pressure drainage in treatment group was significantly better than the traditional and persistent lavage treatment group, but the difference was. not stat i st1cai1y significant (P>0.05)Vacuum sealing drainage for the treatment group and the traditional and persistent lavage treatment groups compared: significantly reduced the infection controltime, hospitalization time, promote wound healing, reduce the long time hospi tal izat ion of patients brought economic burden: relieve patients during the treatment of pain.Conclusion:Fractures Postoperative infection is a severe complication of fracture treatment. The incidence increased significantly, has been the orthopaedist problems, closed negative pressure drainage (VSD) is present for the soft tissue injury more mature new technologies, it is a safe, effective, simple method of treatment.Persistent lavage method compared with traditional, not only reduces the workload of the medical staff, convenient operation, at the same time was obviously shortened time of infection control, hospital stay, can promote wound healing, reduce process in the treatment of patients with pain, improve the cure rate, for the treatment of fractures of postoperative infection and provide technical reference.