中华胃肠外科杂志
中華胃腸外科雜誌
중화위장외과잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY
2013年
7期
645-647
,共3页
痔%选择性痔上黏膜切除术%吻合器痔上黏膜环切钉合术%治疗效果
痔%選擇性痔上黏膜切除術%吻閤器痔上黏膜環切釘閤術%治療效果
치%선택성치상점막절제술%문합기치상점막배절정합술%치료효과
Hemorrhoids%Tissue selecting therapy stapler%Precedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids%Treatment outcomes
目的 分析对比选择性痔上黏膜切除术(TST)与吻合器痔上黏膜环切钉合术(PPH)治疗重度内痔的临床疗效及并发症发生率.方法 回顾性分析福建医科大学附属第一医院胃肠外科于2010年11月至2012年1月收治的542例重度内痔患者的临床资料.其中TST治疗组258例,PPH治疗组284例,评估两组患者手术情况和术后3个月疗效及并发症发生率.结果 TST组手术时间[(20.6±4.7) min]和术后住院时间[(2.9±0.5)d]明显短于PPH组[(26.4±6.3) min和(3.5±0.7)d](均P<0.05).TST组和PPH组治愈率分别为96.5%(249/258)和95.4%(271/284),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);但TST组患者术后疼痛、出血量、肛门坠胀感及尿潴留的评分值均明显低于PPH组(P<0.01).术后TST组无肛门狭窄发生,而PPH组有5例(1.8%)出现肛门狭窄(P<0.01).结论 TST与PPH治疗重度内痔临床疗效均满意,但行TST的患者术后恢复快,并发症发生率低.
目的 分析對比選擇性痔上黏膜切除術(TST)與吻閤器痔上黏膜環切釘閤術(PPH)治療重度內痔的臨床療效及併髮癥髮生率.方法 迴顧性分析福建醫科大學附屬第一醫院胃腸外科于2010年11月至2012年1月收治的542例重度內痔患者的臨床資料.其中TST治療組258例,PPH治療組284例,評估兩組患者手術情況和術後3箇月療效及併髮癥髮生率.結果 TST組手術時間[(20.6±4.7) min]和術後住院時間[(2.9±0.5)d]明顯短于PPH組[(26.4±6.3) min和(3.5±0.7)d](均P<0.05).TST組和PPH組治愈率分彆為96.5%(249/258)和95.4%(271/284),差異無統計學意義(P>0.05);但TST組患者術後疼痛、齣血量、肛門墜脹感及尿潴留的評分值均明顯低于PPH組(P<0.01).術後TST組無肛門狹窄髮生,而PPH組有5例(1.8%)齣現肛門狹窄(P<0.01).結論 TST與PPH治療重度內痔臨床療效均滿意,但行TST的患者術後恢複快,併髮癥髮生率低.
목적 분석대비선택성치상점막절제술(TST)여문합기치상점막배절정합술(PPH)치료중도내치적림상료효급병발증발생솔.방법 회고성분석복건의과대학부속제일의원위장외과우2010년11월지2012년1월수치적542례중도내치환자적림상자료.기중TST치료조258례,PPH치료조284례,평고량조환자수술정황화술후3개월료효급병발증발생솔.결과 TST조수술시간[(20.6±4.7) min]화술후주원시간[(2.9±0.5)d]명현단우PPH조[(26.4±6.3) min화(3.5±0.7)d](균P<0.05).TST조화PPH조치유솔분별위96.5%(249/258)화95.4%(271/284),차이무통계학의의(P>0.05);단TST조환자술후동통、출혈량、항문추창감급뇨저류적평분치균명현저우PPH조(P<0.01).술후TST조무항문협착발생,이PPH조유5례(1.8%)출현항문협착(P<0.01).결론 TST여PPH치료중도내치림상료효균만의,단행TST적환자술후회복쾌,병발증발생솔저.
Objective To compare the efficacy and complication of tissue selecting therapy stapler (TST) and procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) in the treatment of severe hemorrhoids.Methods Clinical data of 542 cases of severe hemorrhoids undergoing TST(258 cases) or PPH (284 cases) in The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University from November 2010 to January 2012 were analyzed retrospectively.Operaitve parameters,efficacy and complication 3 months after operation were assessed and compared.Results No significant difference in cure rate between TST and PPH(96.5% vs.95.4%) was found,while the operation time and hospital stay after operation in TST group were significantly shorter urgency [(20.6±4.7) vs.(26.4±6.3) min,(2.9±0.5) vs.(3.5±0.7) d,both P<0.05].Incidences of postoperative pain,bleeding, anal urgency and urinary retention in TST group were significantly lower than those in PPH group (all P<0.01).No anal stenosis was observed in TST group,and 5 cases developed anal stenosis in PPH group (P<0.05).Hemorrhoid recurrence did not differ significantly between the two groups.Conclusions The efficacy of TST and PPH is comparable for severe hemorrhoids patients,while TST is associated with faster postoperative recovery and less complications.