59例痔疮手术中骶管阻滞和硬膜外腔阻滞的效果比较分析

A Comparative Analysis of the Effect Between Caudal Block and Epidural Anesthesia in 59 Cases of Hemorrhoid Surgery

目的探讨针对痔疮手术患者,对比采用骶管阻滞以及硬膜外腔阻滞两种方法完成麻醉后的效果表现。方法选取该院2010年09月—2012年09月痔疮手术患者59例,利用随机数表法针对患者完成随机分组,组别名称设为A1组与A2组。针对A1组的30例患者,对其采用骶管阻滞的方法进行麻醉;针对A2组的29例患者,对其采用硬膜外腔阻滞的方法进行麻醉,对比两组患者完成麻醉后的效果表现。结果完成麻醉之后发现,A1组患者完成麻醉后发挥作用的时间显著低于A2组患者(P=0.001)。对两组患者的麻醉效果进行评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在运动评分方面,A1组患者显著低于A2组患者(P<0.001)。结论针对痔疮手术患者,采用骶管阻滞的方法进行麻醉,最终效果表现良好,针对治疗效果具有显著的促进作用。

Objective To compare the effect between caudal block and epidural anesthesia for hemorrhoid surgery. Methods 59 cases of patients underwent hemorrhoid surgery in our hospital from September, 2010 to September, 2012 were selected and ran-domly divided into group A1 and group A2 according to the random number table method. Caudal block anesthesia was given to the 30 patients in group A1, and epidural anesthesia was given to the 29 patients in group A2. The anesthesia effect of two groups was compared. Results After the completion of anesthesia, it was found that the duration of anesthesia of group A1 was significant-ly shorter than that of group A2 （P=0.001）. It was found eventually that the difference in anesthetic effect score between the two groups of patients was not statistically significant （P〉0.05）. The sports score of group A1 was significantly lower than that of group A2 （P〈0.001）. Conclusion For patients with hemorrhoid surgery, the ultimate effect of caudal block anesthesia is better, and which has a significant role in promoting the treatment.