期刊文献+

吻合器痔上黏膜环形切除术与外剥内扎术的对比研究 被引量:64

Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: a randomised controlled trial
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨吻合器痔上黏膜环形切除术(PPH)治疗重度脱垂性混合痔的临床效果。方法将354例Ⅲ~Ⅳ度混合痔患者随机分组进行PPH(治疗组)和外剥内扎术(对照组)治疗,每组177例,对比观察两组手术时间、创口愈合时间、住院时间、术后疼痛指数、肛门功能测定及术后并发症发生率等指标。结果手术后两组患者原有症状均得到了有效控制。手术时间、创面愈合时间和住院时间治疗组与对照组分别为(13.5±3.2)与(26.6±6.3)min、(7.0±2.5)与(24.0±8.0)d和(3.0±1.0)与(10.5±3.5)d,两组比较,(P<0.01)。术后疼痛指数治疗组(2.3±1.2)明显低于对照组(7.7±1.1)(P<0.01);治疗组肛门功能的恢复优于对照组,肛管压力测定治疗组手术前后无变化;而对照组术后明显降低(P<0.01)。术后并发症的发生率两组比较,除肛缘外残留皮赘发生率治疗组(7.9%)较对照组(4.5%)增多(P<0.05)外,其余差异均无显著性意义(P>0.05)。结论PPH在治疗Ⅲ~Ⅳ度混合痔方面明显优于传统手术,但长期疗效尚需追踪随访。 Objective To evaluate the efficacy of procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids(PPH) for the treatment of Ⅲ~Ⅳdegree hemorrhoids. Method Three hundred and fifty four patients were randomly divided into two groups and received PPH(n=177) and Milligan Morgan haemorrhoidectomy(n=177) respectively. Operating time,wound healing time,hospital stay,pain scores,anal function and postoperative complications were compared. Results The operating and wound healing times and hospital stay were(13.5±3.2)min,(7.0±2.5)d and (3.0±1.0)d respectively in PPH group,all significantly shorter than (26.6±6.3)min,(24.0±8.0)d and (10.5±3.5)d in Milligan Morgan group (P< 0.01). Postoperative pain scores and anal function restoration were better in PPH group than those in Milligan Morgan group(P< 0.01). There was no difference in postoperative morbidity rates between two groups except a higher morbidity rate(7.9%) of rudimental acrochordons in PPH group. Conclusions As compared with the traditional Milligan Morgan operation,PPH is a safe and effective procedure for Ⅲand Ⅳdegree hemorrhoids. However,long term outcomes require further study.
出处 《中华胃肠外科杂志》 CAS 2004年第5期386-388,共3页 Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
关键词 对照组 治疗组 吻合器痔上黏膜环形切除术 外剥内扎术 PPH 发生率 肛门功能 procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids Milligan Morgan Hemorrhoids
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1Law WL, Chu KW. Triple rubber band ligation for hemorrhoids:prospective, randomized trial of use of local anesthetic injection.Dis Colon Rectum, 1999, 42: 363-366.
  • 2Mehigan B J, Monson JR, Harlley JE. Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy:randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2000, 355: 782-785.
  • 3Thomson WH. The nature of haemorrhoids. Br J Surg, 1975, 62:542-552.
  • 4Longo A. Treatment of hemorrhoids disease by reduction of mucosa and haemorrhodial prolapse with a circular suturing device: a new procedure. Proceeding of 6th World Congress of Endoscopic Surgery, 1998. 777-784.
  • 5Shalaby R, Desoky A. Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg, 2001, 88: 1049-1053.
  • 6Beattie GC, Lam LPH, London MA. A prospective evaluation of the introduction of circumgerential stapled anoplasty in the management of haemorrhoids and mucosal prolapse. Colorectal Dis, 2000, 2: 137-142.
  • 7姚礼庆,钟芸诗,孙益红,戈少云,刘厚宝,郑烈伟.吻合器痔上黏膜环形切除术治疗重度痔疮的3年疗效评价[J].中华胃肠外科杂志,2004,7(2):120-123. 被引量:98
  • 8Cheetham M J, Mortensen NJ, Nystrom PO, et al. Persistent pain and faecal urgency after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet,2000, 356: 730-733.
  • 9Seow-Choen F. Stapled haemorrhoidectomy: pain or gain. Br J Surg, 2001, 88: 1-3.
  • 10Capomagi A, Mannetta V, Balestrieri A, et al. Circular haemorrhoidectomy using a stapler: the gold standard for the treatment of haemorrhoids? Preliminary data regarding 206 consecutive patients. Ital J Coloproctol, 1999, 2: 39-43.

二级参考文献5

共引文献97

同被引文献342

引证文献64

二级引证文献405

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部