瘢痕防治在痤疮引流术治疗中的综合运用
Integrated Use of Preventing and Controlling Scars after Acne Drainage Surgery

分析痤疮引流术后瘢痕防治的最佳途径，探讨综合治疗法与常规治疗法的疗效对比，运用医学实验观测手段，在2023年5月至2024年5月期间，随机抽取180名痤疮引流术后留下的瘢痕患者，作为研究样本，将样本均等分割为实验组和对照组。对照组实施了标准治疗方案，综合了抗瘢痕药物、瘢痕贴剂及激光治疗等多种治疗法；实验组采用了综合治疗法，涉及硅胶粘贴、弹力护套、硅酮类产品、瘢痕皮下注射治疗、点阵激光手术及手术治疗等多种技术。治疗后，审视并对比两组病患的永久性瘢痕发生率、患者满意度以及术后并发症和不良反响，永久性瘢痕的发生率仅为1.11% (即90人中有1人)，对照组数据减少了20.00% (18/90)之多，数据对比分析表明，差异显著(P < 0.05)。从患者满意度角度出发，实验组满意度百分百满分反馈，对照组高出96.67个百分点，与对照组相比，满意度显著提升(P < 0.05)，满意度极高，此外，与对照组相比，实验组术后感染、色素沉着、瘢痕增生等不良反应发生率有所下降，综合不良反应比率7.78%，需留意，该组数据比对照组减少35.56%，差异极为显著(P < 0.001)。痤疮引流术后瘢痕修复，综合治疗法效果斐然，有效减少永久性瘢痕的形成概率，增进患者满意度水平，减少术后并发症及不良反应的潜在危害，临床应用中极具推广价值。
The objective of this study was to analyse the most effective methods for preventing and controlling scars after drainage surgery. In addition, the efficacy of integrated treatment methods was compared with that of conventional treatment methods. To this end, 180 patients with scars resulting from acne drainage were randomly selected as a study sample between May 2023 and May 2024. The samples were divided equally into an experimental group and a control group. The control group underwent a standard treatment protocol comprising a range of techniques, including the use of anti-scar medications, scar patches and laser therapy. In contrast, the experimental group received a combination of treatments involving various techniques, such as silicone paste, elasticated sheaths, silicone-based products, subcutaneous injection treatment of scars, fractional laser surgery and surgical treatment. Following treatment, the incidence of permanent scarring, patient satisfaction, and postoperative complications and adverse reactions in the two groups of patients were examined and compared. The incidence of permanent scarring was found to be only 1.11% (namely, 1 out of 90 people). Furthermore, the data for the control group was reduced by as much as 20.00% (18/90), and a comparative analysis of the data demonstrated a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). From the perspective of patient satisfaction, the experimental group provided 100 per cent full feedback, while the control group provided feedback with a satisfaction level higher than 96.67 percentage points. Compared with the control group, the experimental group exhibited a significantly increased satisfaction level (P < 0.05), with an extremely high level of satisfaction. In addition, compared with the control group,