RESUMEN
The aims of this randomised controlled study were to determine whether the application of silicone adhesive dressings with standard preventive care would reduce the impairment of skin integrity and to evaluate the subepidermal moisture (SEM) value in anatomical locations to predict impairment of skin integrity. Of the 71 intensive care unit patients enrolled, 35 and 31 were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. The SEM value was measured at each site (the coccyx, sacrum, and both buttocks) repeatedly three times at every dressing change. Collected data were analysed by multivariate linear regression, and least square means analysis was used to compare the SEM value at the sites of pressure injury (PI) and blanching erythema. There were fewer PIs (1 vs 9) and incidences of blanching erythema (5 vs 6) in the intervention group than in the control group (P = 0.006). The SEM value and difference of the SEM value from the initial value was higher in the group with PIs than in the group without PIs (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.001, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of impaired skin integrity between the groups. The SEM value may be an indicator for detecting impairment of skin integrity.
Asunto(s)
Vendajes , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Región Sacrococcígea/fisiopatología , Siliconas/administración & dosificación , Cuidados de la Piel/métodos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Úlcera por Presión/prevención & control , Región Sacrococcígea/lesionesRESUMEN
In living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), the standard right graft has been adopted by many centers to meet the metabolic demands of large recipients. In conventional right liver graft, congestion at anterior section may be problematic especially when graft volume is insufficient. We previously introduced a technical aspect of modified extended right hepatectomy (MERH), in which the middle hepatic vein was excavated by preserving the entire segment 4 (Sg4) to the donor. In this report, we investigated the safety of donors who received MERH. Between August 2002 and July 2005, 97 donors underwent right liver donation. MERH was considered when remnant-left liver volume exceeded 35% of whole liver. Eighteen donors underwent MERH (MERH group, n=18). We compared the clinical outcomes of MERH group with those of donors who underwent conventional right hepatectomy (RH) with remnant liver volume exceeding 35% (RH group, n=37). No donor mortality occurred. No intra-operative transfusion and no re-operation were performed. There were no differences in operative time (290.8 min in MERH group vs. 297.0 min in RH group, respectively), blood loss (453.3 ml vs. 426.5 ml), and postoperative hospital stay (12.5 days vs. 12.8 days) between the two groups (P>0.05). Period of drain removal was longer in MERH group (12.5 days vs. 9.4 days, P<0.05). But, there was no difference in complication rate between the two groups (11/18 vs. 23/37, P>0.05). Computed tomography scan showed that congestion of Sg4 was occurred in 13 out of 18 MERH donors in early postoperative period, but all recovered at 4 months. The regeneration of the remnant liver after MERH and RH were similar (209.8% vs. 200.0% at 4 months, P>0.05). Our results show that MERH did not impair recovery or liver regeneration in donors, and indicate that MERH can be safely done in adult LDLT when the remnant liver exceeds 35%.