m+Medelevator.RU
← Поиск публикаций
Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2022

Evaluation of a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and wound cosmesis after CIED implantation.

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Rojas Edward, Morgaenko Katerina, Brown Louis, Kim Sieu, Mazimba Sula, Malhotra Rohit, Darby Andrew, Monfredi Oliver, Mason Pamela, Mangrum James Michael, Haines David E, Campbell Christopher, Bilchick Kenneth, Mehta Nishaki K

Аннотация

BACKGROUND: An important complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation is the development of hematoma and device infection.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate a novel mechanical compression device for hematoma prevention and cosmetic outcomes following CIED implantation.

METHODS: An open, prospective, randomized, single-center clinical trial was performed in patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were randomized to receive a novel mechanical compression device (PressRite, PR) or to receive the standard of care post device implantation. Skin pliability was measured with a calibrated durometer; the surgical site was evaluated using the Manchester Scar Scale (MSS) by a blinded plastic surgeon and the Patient and Observer Scar Scale (POSAS). Performance of PR was assessed through pressure measurements, standardized scar scales and tolerability.

RESULTS: From the total of 114 patients evaluated for enrollment, 105 patients were eligible for analysis. Fifty-one patients were randomized to management group (PR) and 54 to the control group. No patients required early removal or experienced adverse effects from PR application. There were 11 hematomas (14.8% vs. 5.9% in the control and PR group respectively, p = NS). The control group had higher post procedure durometer readings in the surgical site when compared with the PR group (7.50 ± 3.45 vs. 5.37 ± 2.78; p = < .01). There were lower MSS scores in the PR group after 2 weeks (p = .03).

CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated the safety of PR application and removal. In addition, PR appears to improve postoperative skin pliability, which could facilitate wound healing.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

ИП Урсолов Владлен Сергеевич

ИНН 500118482352 · ОГРНИП 314500117700049

Реквизиты и контакты