切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华诊断学电子杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (02) : 98 -102. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2026.02.004

临床研究

基于年龄分层的儿童面部外伤瘢痕差异化诊断与治疗
翟君宇, 戚伟伟, 潮敏()   
  1. 230000 合肥,安徽医科大学儿童医学中心
  • 收稿日期:2026-03-16 出版日期:2026-05-26
  • 通信作者: 潮敏
  • 基金资助:
    安徽省教育厅重点项目(2023AH050665)

Age-stratified differential diagnosis and treatment of pediatric facial traumatic scars

Junyu Zhai, Weiwei Qi, Min Chao()   

  1. Children′s Medical Center, Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230000, China
  • Received:2026-03-16 Published:2026-05-26
  • Corresponding author: Min Chao
引用本文:

翟君宇, 戚伟伟, 潮敏. 基于年龄分层的儿童面部外伤瘢痕差异化诊断与治疗[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 98-102.

Junyu Zhai, Weiwei Qi, Min Chao. Age-stratified differential diagnosis and treatment of pediatric facial traumatic scars[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Diagnostics(Electronic Edition), 2026, 14(02): 98-102.

目的

探讨年龄分层在儿童面部外伤瘢痕的差异化诊断与治疗中的应用价值。

方法

回顾性分析2024年6月至2025年12月安徽省儿童医院烧伤整形外科接受标准化治疗的186例面部外伤患儿临床资料,按年龄分为幼儿期组(1~3岁,92例)和学龄期组(6~12岁,94例)。采用独立样本t检验或χ2检验,比较两组患儿术后3个月瘢痕宽度、温哥华瘢痕量表(VSS)评分、并发症发生率和瘢痕相关自觉症状等。采用多因素线性回归分析瘢痕宽度和VSS评分的影响因素。

结果

学龄期组瘢痕宽度[(0.78±0.23)mm]低于幼儿期组[(0.92±0.28)mm](t=9.578,P<0.01);VSS总分[(3.02±1.03)分]、厚度[(0.82±0.36)分]、柔软度[(0.55±0.27)分]低于幼儿期组[(3.56±1.08)分、(1.05±0.41)分、(0.74±0.30)分],均差异有统计学意义(t=3.218,3.875,4.012;均P< 0.01)。两组术后并发症(感染、线结排异、瘢痕增生)和瘢痕相关自觉症状(疼痛、瘙痒、灼热感)发生率比较,均差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.258,1.784;均P> 0.05)。多因素线性回归分析显示,年龄(幼儿期)(β=0.215,95%CI:0.054~0.376)、伤口宽度(β=0.326,95%CI:0.147~0.505)是瘢痕宽度再增加的影响因素(t=2.622,3.582;均P< 0.01);年龄(幼儿期)(β=0.198,95%CI:0.049~0.347)、伤口长度(β=0.287,95%CI:0.119~0.455)是VSS评分升高的影响因素(t=2.605,3.376;均P< 0.05)。

结论

儿童面部外伤瘢痕预后存在年龄差异,需基于年龄分层实施个体化诊断与治疗,以改善预后。

Objective

To investigate the clinical value of age stratification in the differential diagnosis and treatment of facial trauma scars in children.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 186 children with facial trauma who received standardized treatment at the Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Anhui Provincial Children′s Hospital, between June 2024 and December 2025. The patients were stratified by age into a toddler group (1-3 years, n=92) and a school-age group (6-12 years, n=94). Independent-samples t tests or chi-square tests were used to compare scar width, Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores, complication rates, and scar-related subjective symptoms between the 2 groups at 3 months postoperatively. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify the influencing factors for scar width and VSS scores.

Results

The postoperative scar width in the school-age group [(0.78±0.23)mm] was significantly lower to that in the toddler group[(0.92±0.28)mm](t=9.578, P< 0.01). Furthermore, the total VSS scores (3.02±1.03), scar thickness (0.82±0.36), and scar pliability (0.55±0.27) in the school-age group were significantly lower than those in the toddler group (3.56±1.08, 1.05±0.41, and 0.74±0.30, respectively) (t=3.218, 3.875, 4.012, all P< 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the incidence of postoperative complications (infection, suture reaction, and hypertrophic scarring) and scar-related subjective symptoms (pain, pruritus, and burning sensation) (χ2=1.258, 1.784, all P> 0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that age (toddler period) (β=0.215, 95%CI: 0.054-0.376) and initial wound width (β=0.326, 95%CI: 0.147-0.505) were significant influencing factors for the further increase of scar width (t=2.622, 3.582, all P<0.01). Furthermore, age (toddler period) (β=0.198, 95%CI: 0.049-0.347) and inith wound length (β=0.287, 95%CI: 0.119-0.455) were significantly influencing factors for the elevation of VSS scores (t=2.605, 3.376, all P< 0.05).

Conclusions

There are age-related differences in the prognosis of facial traumatic scars in children. Individualized diagnosis and treatment based on age stratification are needed to improve the prognosis.

表1 两组面部外伤患儿基线资料比较
表2 两组面部外伤患儿术后3个月瘢痕相关指标比较(±s)
表3 两组面部外伤患儿术后并发症及自觉症状比较[例(%)]
表4 瘢痕宽度影响因素的多因素线性回归分析
表5 VSS评分影响因素的多因素线性回归分析
[1]
岳晓洁,戴叶锋,赵雄,等.儿童面部急性外伤临床分析及整形美容技术的应用探讨[J].中华整形外科杂志202137(10):1163-1167.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn114453-20190401-00115.
[2]
李娜.急诊儿童面部外伤的整形美容外科技术治疗[J].华夏医学202134(1):148-151.DOI:10.19296/j.cnki.1008-2409.2021-01-041.
[3]
刘聪,徐冰,聂芬,等.整形美容外科技术治疗急诊面部外伤的疗效探讨[J].中国美容医学201928(7):62-66.DOI:10.15909/j.cnki.cn61-1347/r.003147.
[4]
Antonious K.Pediatric facial lacerations:evidence-based over-the-counter wound care and scar prevention for clinicians and caregivers[J].Cureus202517(6):e85909.DOI:10.7759/cureus.85909.
[5]
辛增桃,姚平.儿童早期瘢痕治疗策略[J].组织工程与重建外科202117(6):468-471.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1673-0364.2021.06.003.
[6]
Demke JCNagy KK.Pediatric facial soft tissue repair and reconstruction[J].Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am202432(1):85-94.DOI:10.1016/j.fsc.2023.07.007.
[7]
梁奕敏,王丹茹.儿童瘢痕的综合治疗[J].组织工程与重建外科杂志201713(5):263-267,278.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1673-0364.2017.05.007.
[8]
魏亚利,潘燕,高艳,等.阶梯式压力治疗在婴幼儿深度烧伤后瘢痕防治中的应用效果[J].临床医学研究与实践20238(29):154-157.DOI:10.19347/j.cnki.2096-1413.202329039.
[9]
张娜,张淼芳,白梦箫,等.MBVMS与传统缝合对瘢痕子宫剖宫产患者切口愈合、VSS评分及美观度的影响[J].中国妇产科临床杂志202324(3):254-257.DOI:10.13390/j.issn.1672-1861.2023.03.010.
[10]
翟君宇,程远,戚伟伟.改良垂直埋没褥式缝合在小儿面部外伤中的应用效果观察[J/OL].中华诊断学电子杂志202513(3):188-192[2026-03-16].DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2025.03.008.
[11]
高莹,鲁楠,职蕾蕾,等.婴幼儿皮肤结构和生理特征的研究进展[J].中国美容医学201524(3):77-80.DOI:10.15909/j.cnki.cn61-1347/r.000215.
[12]
Tottoli EMDorati RGenta I,et al.Skin wound healing process and new emerging technologies for skin wound care and regeneration[J].Pharmaceutics202012(8):735.DOI:10.3390/pharmaceutics12080735.
[13]
Wilkinson HNHardman MJ.Wound healing:cellular mechanisms and pathological outcomes[J].Open Biol202010(9):200223.DOI:10.1098/rsob.200223.
[14]
Leszczynski Rda Silva CAPinto A,et al.Laser therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars[J].Cochrane Database Syst Rev2022(9):CD011642.DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD011642.pub2.
[15]
Clementi ACannarozzo GGuarino L,et al.Combined laser strategies for scar treatment:a comprehensive review of synergistic protocols[J].Bioengineering (Basel)202512(12).DOI:10.3390/bioengineering12121368.
[16]
Kauvar AKubicki SLSuggs AK,et al.Laser therapy of traumatic and surgical scars and an algorithm for their treatment[J].Lasers Surg Med202052(2):125-136.DOI:10.1002/lsm.23171.
[17]
Seago MShumaker PRSpring LK,et al.Laser treatment of traumatic scars and contractures:2020 international consensus recommendations[J].Lasers Surg Med202052(2):96-116.DOI:10.1002/lsm.23201.
[1] 王静坤, 计美妮, 王玉凤, 宣浩军. 真空辅助乳腺活检与空芯针穿刺活检在乳腺癌诊断中的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 163-168.
[2] 张猛, 李军, 李娜, 孙豪, 韩军涛. 小儿烧伤后手指掌侧瘢痕的临床分型与治疗方式探讨[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(03): 177-182.
[3] 曾妍, 朱遇安, 陶紫涵, 金剑, 刘青松, 朱世辉. 重组人Ⅲ型胶原蛋白在皮肤创面与瘢痕中的应用[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(03): 229-235.
[4] 何宇杭, 曹中伟. 中性粒细胞百分比-白蛋白比值与乳腺癌的关联性及预测效能研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 279-283.
[5] 张俊峰, 牛越, 陈鹏. 局部进展期肾细胞癌新辅助和辅助治疗策略的现实挑战与未来发展[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 248-254.
[6] 许颜浩, 邓正根, 张晓坡, 甘卫东, 郭宏骞. 基于CT角度界面和溢啤酒征对乏脂性肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤与肾透明细胞癌的鉴别[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 273-278.
[7] 陈海珊, 李琨. 前列腺癌接受雄激素剥夺治疗患者及其配偶二元应对与心理困扰的主客体效应分析[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 323-329.
[8] 李钰, 叶璟威, 戚维天, 叶云林, 李向东, 李志勇, 刘卓炜. 广东省医学会泌尿外科疑难病例多学科会诊(第30期)——严重泌尿系感染伴淋巴结肿大[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 358-362.
[9] 中国研究型医院学会放射学专业委员会, 上海抗癌协会实体肿瘤聚焦诊疗专业委员会. 血管包裹肿瘤簇在肝细胞癌影像诊疗中的临床应用专家共识(2026年版)[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(03): 193-198.
[10] 张婧萱, 郭佳星, 李紫红, 陈怡颖, 乔媛, 宝莹娜. 多线治疗失败后31例复发转移性结直肠癌局部挽救性放射治疗的研究[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(03): 206-211.
[11] 江学良. 痔疮内镜治疗策略与技巧[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(03): 242-242.
[12] 沈燕, 施金金, 陈颖青, 钮文思, 龚恬安. 电解质紊乱与凝血功能异常对轮状病毒肠炎患儿补液治疗失败的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(03): 278-283.
[13] 齐洪武, 徐泽雨. 脑脓肿的临床诊治进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 327-331.
[14] 洪士皓, 杨昕. 个性化骨科手术中3D打印技术的临床应用与展望[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 249-255.
[15] 席雅楠, 姚国栋, 郭秀珍, 高斌礼, 赵渊, 李婷, 钟李岩, 李梦倩. IDEAS模式对机器人辅助结直肠癌根治术患者康复结局的影响[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(04): 285-291.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?