Literature DB >> 7990623

[Pressure-volume analysis of wound suction drainage containers and suction capacity of drainage tubes].

C Mohadjer1, R Siegert, H Jäger, H Weidauer.   

Abstract

Four low-vacuum systems and eight high-vacuum systems were examined with special reference to the pressure-volume relations. The maximum filling volume for adequate transport of wound secretion was determined for each type. The use of a synthetic wound fluid instead of water resulted in a smaller aspiration volume. Enlargement of the tube diameter resulted in a reduced initial vacuum for the low-vacuum systems, whereas the high-vacuum systems were not affected. Normal drain tubes were compared with "Ulm drains" and silicon tubes for suction capacity. The suction maximum of normal tubes and silicon tubes was located at the proximal holes of the perforated tubes. The "Ulm drain," with perforation diameter increasing continuously to the distal end of the tube, was found to exert suction even at the more distal part of the tube. It is estimated that this tube allows locally more balanced vacuum in the wound.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7990623     DOI: 10.1007/BF00186394

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Chir        ISSN: 0023-8236


  10 in total

1.  [Closure under reduced atmospheric pressure of extensive wounds].

Authors:  H REDON
Journal:  Mem Acad Chir (Paris)       Date:  1954 Mar 24-Apr 7

2.  [Gravity drainage versus suction drainage: an experimental and clinical study].

Authors:  H Gerngross; V Engler
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  [Risks of wound infection caused by drainage].

Authors:  W Brunner; A Härle
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  1989 Jul-Aug

4.  [Physical flow studies of new surgical aspiration drains].

Authors:  L Kinzl; A Müller; D Wolter; C Burri
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  1976-01       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  [Clinical use and comparative study of Ulmer drainage and of the usual Redon tissue drainage].

Authors:  C Enneker; E Fleischmann; T Lange
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  1979-10       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  A comparison between disposable and non-disposable suction drainage units: a report of a controlled trial.

Authors:  B J Britton; O J Gilmore; J S Lumley; W M Castleden
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1979-04       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  [Flow examination of redon-suction drainage (author's transl)].

Authors:  D Wolter; A Müller; L Kinzl; C Burri
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Chir       Date:  1974

8.  [Does prolonged insertion of the Redon drain increase the postoperative risk of infection?].

Authors:  H K Kaufner; B Friedrich
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  1974-03       Impact factor: 0.955

9.  [Weaknesses of conventional drainage systems].

Authors:  A Härle
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  1989 Jul-Aug

10.  [Progress in wound drainage].

Authors:  R Stücker; A Härle
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  1989 Jul-Aug
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.