Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1992 Feb:(2):94-101.

[The use of the carbon dioxide laser in acute surgical infection of the soft tissues]

[Article in Russian]
  • PMID: 1527986
Comparative Study

[The use of the carbon dioxide laser in acute surgical infection of the soft tissues]

[Article in Russian]
S E Kuleshov et al. Khirurgiia (Mosk). 1992 Feb.

Abstract

Clinico-laboratory studies were conducted in 46 patients with wound infection for the treatment of which carbon-dioxide laser was used, and in 78 patients who were operated on with a metal scalpel (control). It is shown that "excision" and "evaporation" of tissues took 15-45 minutes. Repeated interventions were performed in 15% of cases due to bleeding from vessels measuring 1.0-1.5 mm in diameter. After surgical debridement with a scalpel the number of microbes reduced from 10(7)-10(9) to 10(3)-10(4) per g. After exposure to the laser beam this value was 10(1) but on day 3-4 it was 10(5)-10(6). The extent of the zone of coagulation necrosis in the zone exposed to the laser beams measured up to 500 microns, and began diminishing only on day 7-9 of postoperation. Suppuration of the wounds in 56% of patients of the main group treated by operation was in conformity with the results of bacteriological and morphological studies. In the control group this index was 15.4%. It is concluded that the use of carbon-dioxide laser as a "light scalpel" with subsequent primary closure of the wound is inexpedient. Its use in preparing a wound for closure with secondary sutures has no advantages over radical surgical debridement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by