Klinička studija o uticaju materijala za šivenje na zarastanje oralne rane

  • Dragan Gazivoda Clinic of Oral Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia; Faculty of Medicine of the Military Medical Academy, University of Defence, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Dejan Pelemiš Clinic of Oral Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Goran Vujašković Faculty of Dentistry, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
Ključne reči: oral surgical procedures||, ||hirurgija, oralna, procedure, sutures||, ||šavovi, treatment outcome||, ||lečenje, ishod,

Sažetak


Uvod/Cilj. Materijali za šivenje igraju važnu ulogu u zarastanju rane, omogućavajući rekonstrukciju i vraćanje razdvojenog tkiva tokom hirurške procedure ili traume, i u isto vreme omogućavaju i pospešuju zarastanje i hemostazu. Materijali za šavove svakodnevno se koriste u oralnoj hirurgiji i smatraju se supstancama koje se najčešće implantiraju u ljudsko telo. Cilj ove kliničke studije  je da se ispita brzina zarastanja rana, učestalosti komplikacija nakon primene tri različita resorptivna sintetička materijala za šivenje u oralnoj hirurgiji (catgut, Dexon i Vicryl rapide), i da se utvrdi koji je od njih najpogodniji za upotrebu u oralnoj hirurgiji. Metode. Studija je sprovedena na uzorku od 96 pacijenata kod kojih je urađena resekcija korena i hirurška ekstrakcija trećih molara. Svaki od materijala za šavove (catgut, Dexon i Vicryl rapide) upotrebljen je prilikom osam resekcija korena i osam hirurških ekstrakcija trećih molara u maksili i mandibuli (ukupno 32 intervencije za svaki materijal za šavove). Rezultati. Ustanovljeno je brže zarastanje rana uz primenu Vicryl rapide materijala za šavove u odnosu na druga dva testirana materijala. Nije ustanovljena značajna razlika u prisustvu lokalne reakcije kod sve tri grupe bolesnika 21. postoperativnog dana. Zaključak. Rezultati kliničke studije ukazuju na veći doprinos bržem zarastanju rane uz primenu Vicryl rapide materijala u odnosu na catgut i Dexon, sa nekoliko slučajeva dehiscencije rane i ispoljavanjem blaže lokalne reakcije

Reference

Banche G, Roana J, Mandras N, Amasio M, Gallesio C, Allizond V, et al. Microbial adherence on various intraoral suture materials in patients undergoing dental surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65(8): 1503−7.

Kostić I. Impact of suture material and suture techniques on healing of tracheal anastomoses. Niš: Faculty of Medicine, University of Niš; 1989. (Serbian)

Sortino F, Lombardo C, Sciacca A. Silk and polyglycolic acid in oral surgery: a comparative study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105(3): 15−8.

Çapanoğlu D. Sutures, 1999-2000, Spring Term. [cited 2007. September 9]. Available from: http//www.biometu.edu.tr/biomed/sutures.htm

O'Neal RB, Alleyn CD. Suture materials and techniques. Curr Opin Periodontol 1997; 4: 89−95.

Stone IK, von Fraunhofer JA, Masterson BJ. A comparative study of suture materials: chromic gut and chromic gut treated with glycerin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151(8): 1087−93.

Stone IK. Suture materials. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1988; 31(3): 712−7.

Racey GL, Wallace WR, Cavalaris CJ, Marquard JV. Comparison of a polyglycolic-polylactic acid suture toblack silk and plain catgut in human oral tissues. J Oral Surg 1978; 36(10): 776−70.

Guyuron B, Vaughan C. A comparison of absorbable and nonabsorbable suture materials for skin repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 1992; 89(2): 234−6.

Peterson L, Ellis E, Hupp JR, Tucker MR. Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 3rd ed. St Louis, Mo: Mosby Year-Book; 1998.

Gazivoda D, Pelemiš D, Vujašković G. Influence of the suturing material on a wound healing - experimental study in dogs. Vojnosanit Pregl 2015; 72(5): 397–404.

Aderriotis D, Sàndor GK. Outcomes of irradiated polyglactin 910 Vicryl Rapide fast-absorbing suture in oral and scalp wounds. J Can Dent Assoc 1999; 65(6): 345−7.

Mirković S. Impact of suture material on wound healing fol-lowing mucoperiosteal incision. Novi Sad: Faculty of Dentis-try, University of Novi Sad; 2000. (Serbian)

Greene JC, Vermillion JR. The simplified oral hygiene index. J Am Dent Assoc 1964; 68: 7−13.

Loë H. The Gingival Index, the Plaque Index and the Reten-tion Index Systems. J Periodontol 1967; 38: 610−6.

Nary FH, Matsumoto MA, Batista AC, Lopes LC, de Góes FC, Consolaro A. Comparative study of tissue response to poly-glecaprone 25, polyglactin 910 and polytetrafluorethylene su-ture materials in rats. Braz Dent J 2002; 13(2): 86−91.

Filho NH, Okamoto T, Padovan LE. Estudo comparativo da re-sposta tecidual frente a fios de sutura de catgut e poliglecaprone 25 em subcutaneo de ratos. Salusvita 1996; 15(1): 127−42.

Duprez K, Bilweis J, Duprez A, Merle M. Experimental and clini-cal study of fast absorption cutaneous suture material. Ann Chir Main 1988; 7(1): 91−6.

Shaw RJ, Negus TW, Mellor TK. A prospective clinical evalua-tion of the longevity of resorbable sutures in oral mucosa. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996; 34(3): 252−4.

Certosimo FJ, Nicoll BK, Nelson RR, Wolfgang M. Wound healing and repair: a review of the art and science. Gen Dent 1998;46(4):362-9.

Wallace WR, Maxwel GR, Cavalaris CJ. Comparison of poly-glicolic acid to black silk, chromic, and plain catgut in human oral tissues. J Oral Surgery 1970; 28(10): 739−16.

Objavljeno
2015/11/02
Broj časopisa
Rubrika
Originalni članak