包皮切割缝合器包皮环切术与传统包皮环切术临床比较

Clinical comparison of circumcision with circumcision and conventional circumcision of circumcision

目的探讨包皮切割缝合器包皮环切术与传统包皮环切术临床效果。方法选择2015年5月至2017年3月期间在本院行包皮环切术治疗的82例患者作为研究对象,随机分为对照组和观察组,各41例。观察组行包皮切割缝合器包皮环切术治疗,对照组行传统包皮环切术治疗,观察两组患者手术及切口愈合情况,并比较术后并发症发生率和切口美观满意度。结果观察组手术时间(12.03±4.02)min、术中出血量(1.25±0.34)ml及包皮切口愈合时间(10.23±2.37)d均显著短于对照组[(33.14±5.17)min,(6.47±1.78)ml,(13.08±2.02)d],组间差异P<0.05。观察组包皮环切术后并发症发生率(14.63%)显著高于对照组(39.02%),组间差异P<0.05。观察组切口美观满意度(95.12%)显著高于对照组(73.17%),组间差异P<0.05。结论包皮切割缝合器包皮环切术较传统术式,实施更为简单、快捷,手术安全性高,术后恢复速度更快、且包皮切口美观度良好,临床推广价值更高。

Objective To investigate the clinical effect of circumcision with circumcision and traditional circumcision. Methods A total of 82 patients who underwent circumcision from May 2015 to March 2017 were randomly divided into control group and observation group （n = 41）. The patients underwent circumcision with circumcision, and the patients underwent conventional circumcision. The operation and incision healing were observed in the two groups. The incidence of complications and the satisfaction of incision were compared. Results The operative time （12.03 ± 4.02min）, intraoperative blood loss （1.25 ± 0.34）ml and incision healing time （10.23 ± 2.37） d were signifcantly shorter than those in the control group [（33.14 ± 5.17）min, （6.47 ± 1.78）ml, （13.08 ± 2.02）d], the diference between groups P〈0.05. The incidence of complications （14.63%） was signifcantly higher in the observation group than in the control group （39.02%）. The diference between the groups was P 〈0.05. （95.12%） was signifcantly higher than that in the control group （73.17%）. The diference between the groups was P 〈 0.05. Conclusion The circumcision of circumcision with circumcision is more simple, quick, safe in operation, faster in postoperative recovery and good in the foreskin incision, and the clinicalpromotion value is higher.