中国医学创新
中國醫學創新
중국의학창신
MEDICAL INNOVATION OF CHINA
2015年
25期
35-37
,共3页
传统法%商环法%一次性包皮环切缝合器%包皮环切术
傳統法%商環法%一次性包皮環切縫閤器%包皮環切術
전통법%상배법%일차성포피배절봉합기%포피배절술
Traditional circumcision%Plastibell circumcision%Disposable peritomy anastomoses device%Circumcision
目的:对比分析传统法、商环法及一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术的疗效及手术并发症的发生率。方法:回顾性分析本院行传统法、商环法及一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术在手术疗效和并发症等方面比较情况。结果:商环法及一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术在手术时间、手术出血、术后包皮水肿发生率、术后手术满意度方面较,传统法包皮环切术有明显优势,三组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);而传统法及一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术在术后愈合时间较商环包皮环切术有明显优势,传统法的术后愈合时间与一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术无明显差异,在术后血肿发生率方面一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术较前二者均高,三组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:商环法及一次性包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术在手术时间、术后疼痛、术后血肿、术后手术满意度方面较传统法有明显优势,是包皮环切术优先选择的方法,但在术后愈合时间不如传统方法,故行包皮环切术方法的选择要结合患者的意愿及患者的实际情况,选择适合患者的方法,以便使患者达到最满意的疗效。
目的:對比分析傳統法、商環法及一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術的療效及手術併髮癥的髮生率。方法:迴顧性分析本院行傳統法、商環法及一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術在手術療效和併髮癥等方麵比較情況。結果:商環法及一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術在手術時間、手術齣血、術後包皮水腫髮生率、術後手術滿意度方麵較,傳統法包皮環切術有明顯優勢,三組比較差異均有統計學意義(P<0.05);而傳統法及一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術在術後愈閤時間較商環包皮環切術有明顯優勢,傳統法的術後愈閤時間與一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術無明顯差異,在術後血腫髮生率方麵一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術較前二者均高,三組比較差異均有統計學意義(P<0.05)。結論:商環法及一次性包皮環切縫閤器行包皮環切術在手術時間、術後疼痛、術後血腫、術後手術滿意度方麵較傳統法有明顯優勢,是包皮環切術優先選擇的方法,但在術後愈閤時間不如傳統方法,故行包皮環切術方法的選擇要結閤患者的意願及患者的實際情況,選擇適閤患者的方法,以便使患者達到最滿意的療效。
목적:대비분석전통법、상배법급일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술적료효급수술병발증적발생솔。방법:회고성분석본원행전통법、상배법급일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술재수술료효화병발증등방면비교정황。결과:상배법급일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술재수술시간、수술출혈、술후포피수종발생솔、술후수술만의도방면교,전통법포피배절술유명현우세,삼조비교차이균유통계학의의(P<0.05);이전통법급일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술재술후유합시간교상배포피배절술유명현우세,전통법적술후유합시간여일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술무명현차이,재술후혈종발생솔방면일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술교전이자균고,삼조비교차이균유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론:상배법급일차성포피배절봉합기행포피배절술재수술시간、술후동통、술후혈종、술후수술만의도방면교전통법유명현우세,시포피배절술우선선택적방법,단재술후유합시간불여전통방법,고행포피배절술방법적선택요결합환자적의원급환자적실제정황,선택괄합환자적방법,이편사환자체도최만의적료효。
Objective: To access the clinical effects and surgery complication of three different circumcision procedures of traditional, plastibell and disposable peritomy anastomoses device.Method: A retrospective analysis was conducted for 258 patients who received circumcision in our hospital from October 2012 to June 2014. In 258 cases, 81 cases were operated surgery with traditional, 129 cases with plastibell and 48 cases with disposable peritomy anastomoses device circumcision. The effect and surgery complication were compared.Result: Plastibell and disposable peritomy anastomoses device circumcision had obvious advantage on operation time, bleeding, prepuce edema and patient satisfaction rate when compared with traditional circumcision (P<0.05). There was no significant difference on healing time post operation between traditional and disposable peritomy anastomoses device circumcision (P>0.05), while both had shorter healing time when compared with plastebell circumcision (P<0.05).Conclusion: Plastibell and disposable peritomy anastomoses device circumcision have advantage over traditional circumcision on operation time, postoperation pain, postoperation hematoma and patient satisfaction, but inferior on healing time. The selection of different methods for circumcision should give carefully consideration according to the patient’s wills and actual situation to reach the best results.