The American journal of emergency medicine · 2017
Comparison of loop and primary incision & drainage techniques in adult patients with cutaneous abscess: A preliminary, randomized clinical trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Özturan İbrahim Ulaş, Doğan Nurettin Özgür, Karakayalı Onur, Özbek Asım Enes, Yılmaz Serkan, Pekdemir Murat, Suner Selim
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare efficacy of loop drainage and standard incision & drainage (I&D) in adult patients with cutaneous abscess in the emergency department.
METHODS: This study is an interventional, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Adult patients with cutaneous abscess were randomized into loop drainage and standard I&D groups. The primary outcome was defined as change in diameter of abscess and cellulitis 7days after procedure. Secondary outcome measures were pain intensity at the end of the procedure and procedure duration. Also patient satisfaction, need for antibiotics and repetitive drainage were recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 46 patients were included in the study (23 in each group). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Median abscess diameters were 3.2 (1.9-4.0) cm and 3.0 (2.4-4.8) cm in loop drainage and I&D groups respectively. In the loop drainage group there was a -0.6cm (95% CI: -1.7-0.5) difference in abscess diameter compared to the I&D group. There was also a reduction in cellulitis diameter (-1.3cm, 95% CI: -3.4-0.8). No statistically significant difference was found between groups in patient satisfaction, use of antibiotics or need for repetitive drainage.
CONCLUSION: This preliminary study revealed that, loop drainage technique is similar to standard I&D technique in abscess resolution and complications. (Clinical Trials Registration ID: NCT02286479).
METHODS: This study is an interventional, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Adult patients with cutaneous abscess were randomized into loop drainage and standard I&D groups. The primary outcome was defined as change in diameter of abscess and cellulitis 7days after procedure. Secondary outcome measures were pain intensity at the end of the procedure and procedure duration. Also patient satisfaction, need for antibiotics and repetitive drainage were recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 46 patients were included in the study (23 in each group). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Median abscess diameters were 3.2 (1.9-4.0) cm and 3.0 (2.4-4.8) cm in loop drainage and I&D groups respectively. In the loop drainage group there was a -0.6cm (95% CI: -1.7-0.5) difference in abscess diameter compared to the I&D group. There was also a reduction in cellulitis diameter (-1.3cm, 95% CI: -3.4-0.8). No statistically significant difference was found between groups in patient satisfaction, use of antibiotics or need for repetitive drainage.
CONCLUSION: This preliminary study revealed that, loop drainage technique is similar to standard I&D technique in abscess resolution and complications. (Clinical Trials Registration ID: NCT02286479).