CAJ | 학술논문

目的：研究并对比分析善释补片腹膜前间隙修补术和疝环充填式无张力疝修补术在临床上的应用效果。方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2015年1月，广东省梅州市丰顺县人民医院240例无张力腹股沟斜疝患者临床资料，按照所选取治疗手段的不同以及进行腹膜前间隙修补术所选取的补片的不同将所有患者均分至A、B、C三组，每组患者80例。其中A组采用疝环充填式无张力疝修补术进行治疗，B组患者采用北京天助畅运医疗技术股份有限公司生产的善释禧D10腹膜前间隙修补术进行治疗，C组患者则采用美国强生公司生产的超普网塞腹膜前间隙修补术进行治疗。分别对A、B、C三组患者的手术时间、疼痛持续时间、住院时间等临床效果进行对比分析，并观察三组患者的复发情况及并发症发生情况。结果 A组与B、C二组患者并发症及复发情况比较，差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。 A组患者手术时间和疼痛持续时间均明显大于B组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。 BC二组对比可知，对于腹膜前间隙修补术而言，善释禧D10与超普网塞二者均可被患者部分吸收，效果良好，临床差异较小，差异无统计学意义（P＞0．05）。结论较之疝环充填式无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟斜疝，善释网塞和超普网塞腹膜前间隙修补术不仅手术时间、患者疼痛时间短，而且不良并发症较少，尤其是局部异物感症状明显减少，同时，患者可对该补片部分吸收且复发率低，值得重视。对于腹膜前间隙修补术而言，善释网塞与强生公司生产的超普网塞二者差异较小，可根据具体情况进行选择。
목적：연구병대비분석선석보편복막전간극수보술화산배충전식무장력산수보술재림상상적응용효과。방법회고성분석2013년1월지2015년1월，광동성매주시봉순현인민의원240례무장력복고구사산환자림상자료，안조소선취치료수단적불동이급진행복막전간극수보술소선취적보편적불동장소유환자균분지A、B、C삼조，매조환자80례。기중A조채용산배충전식무장력산수보술진행치료，B조환자채용북경천조창운의료기술고빈유한공사생산적선석희D10복막전간극수보술진행치료，C조환자칙채용미국강생공사생산적초보망새복막전간극수보술진행치료。분별대A、B、C삼조환자적수술시간、동통지속시간、주원시간등림상효과진행대비분석，병관찰삼조환자적복발정황급병발증발생정황。결과 A조여B、C이조환자병발증급복발정황비교，차이유통계학의의（P＜0．05）。 A조환자수술시간화동통지속시간균명현대우B조，차이유통계학의의（P＜0．05）。 BC이조대비가지，대우복막전간극수보술이언，선석희D10여초보망새이자균가피환자부분흡수，효과량호，림상차이교소，차이무통계학의의（P＞0．05）。결론교지산배충전식무장력산수보술치료복고구사산，선석망새화초보망새복막전간극수보술불부수술시간、환자동통시간단，이차불량병발증교소，우기시국부이물감증상명현감소，동시，환자가대해보편부분흡수차복발솔저，치득중시。대우복막전간극수보술이언，선석망새여강생공사생산적초보망새이자차이교소，가근거구체정황진행선택。
Objective To study and compare the clinical effect of preperitoneal repair with EasyProsthesis mesh and mesh-plug tension-free inguinal hernia repair .Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 240 cases of inguinal hernia admitted to Meizhou Fengshun People′s Hospital from January 2013 to January 2015 .Patients were randomly assigned to 3 different groups ( 80 cases in each group ) according to different procedure and different preperitoneal mesh: group A received mesh-plug repair with ordinary plug; group B and group C underwent preperitoneal repair with EasyProsthesis D 10 · Xi?(TransEasy Medical Tech.Co., Ltd) and UltraPro mesh (Johnson & Johnson, USA).The clinical effect indicator such as operating time , duration of pain and length of stay were compared between the 3 groups , as well as recurrence and complications .Results There were significant differences in terms of complications and recurrence when compared group A with group B and C (P<0.05).Group A had longer operating time and duration of pain than group B , and the difference was significant (P<0.05).As shown by comparison between group B and C , EasyProsthesis D10 · Xi? and UltraPro were both partially absorbable mesh with good effect and few differences in preperitoneal repair (P>0.05).Conclusion Compared with mesh-plug tension-free hernia repair , prepertoneal repair not only has shorten operation time and duration of pain , but also reduced rate of complications , especially in foreign body sensation .While, the meshes used are partially absorbable without increasing recurrence rate .In terms of preperitoneal repair , the EasyProsthesis D10 is comparable to UltraPro, and both of them can be chosen by individual situations .