两种疝修补术的临床疗效对比分析

The Comparasion of Clinical Efficacy between Two Kinds of Hernia Repair

目的对比分析无张力疝修补术与传统疝修补术的手术疗效。方法将我院2008年1月～2010年1月入选的60例行无张力疝修补术的患者设立为A组,另选同期应用传统疝修补术的患者设立为B组;运用统计学方法,比较两组的手术时间、住院时间、术后并发症等手术观察指标的差异性。结果 A组60例患者的手术时间及术中出血量均小于B组,术后下床活动时间早于B组,A组住院时间明显短于B组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A组60例患者术后并发症发生率明显低于B组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。A组术后6个月和12个月复发率为0,B组复发率合计8.33%(5/60),两组复发率比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论无张力疝修补术疗效确切、安全可行、患者痛苦少、并发症少、复发率低,手术效果优于传统疝修补术,值得推广和应用。

Objective To compare and analyze the clinical efficacy of tension-free hernia repair and traditional hernia repair. Methods All 60 selected regular tension-free hernia repair in patients with established as group A, and to select the traditional hernia repair at the same period as group B, and to compare the operative time, hospital stay, postoperative complications such as surgical indicators by statistical methods. Results The operative time and the blood loss of group A were less than group B, and group A was earlier than group B after getting out of bed, hospital stay of group A was significantly shorter than group B, the difference was statistically significant （ P 〈 0.05 ） .The postoperative complication rate of A group was significantly lower than group B, the difference was statistically significant （ P 〈 0.05 ） .The recurrence rate of group A was significant lower than group A after 6months and 12months. Conclusion The tension-free hernia repair is effective, safe and feasible, less pain, fewer complications, recurrence rate, and it is better than traditional hernia repair, should be promoted and applied.