-
Langenbecks Arch Chir · Jan 1994
Comparative Study[Pressure-volume analysis of wound suction drainage containers and suction capacity of drainage tubes].
- C Mohadjer, R Siegert, H Jäger, and H Weidauer.
- Hals, Nasen- und Ohrenklinik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität, Heidelberg.
- Langenbecks Arch Chir. 1994 Jan 1;379(5):285-90.
AbstractFour 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.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.