胃镜下内痔硬化剂注射治疗的临床应用

Clinical Application of Injection of Sclerosing Agent for Internal Hemorrhoids under Gastroscope

目的对比胃镜下内痔硬化剂注射治疗与传统闭合式痔切除术对于内痔的诊治效果。方法选取2019年5月至2020年3月江西省万载县人民医院收治的200例内痔患者作为研究对象。按照治疗方式不同分为观察组和对照组,各100例。观察组行电子胃镜辅助注入内痔聚桂醇硬化剂治疗,对照组行弗格森法(Ferguson)闭合式痔切除治疗。观察手术及术后恢复状况,并对比治疗费用及效果。结果观察组手术时间、症状消失时间、术中出血量少于对照组(P<0.05);观察组并发症发生率低于对照组(P<0.05);观察组单次治疗费用低于对照组(P<0.05);两组总有效率对比无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论电子胃镜辅助注入聚桂醇硬化剂治疗内痔,术后恢复快,并发症少,费用低。

Objective To compare the effect of injection of sclerosing agent for internal hemorrhoids under gastroscope compared with traditional closed hemorrhoidectomy for the diagnosis and treatment of internal hemorrhoids.Methods From May 2019 to March 2020,200 patients with internal hemorrhoids were selected in People's Hospital of Wanzai County and divided into the observation group and control group,according to the treatment method.The observation group was treated with electronic gastroscopy combined with injection of internal hemorrhoids and laurogol hardener,and the control group was treated with Ferguson closed hemorrhoidectomy.The condition of operation and postoperative recovery were observed,and the cost and effect of treatment were compared.Results The operative time,symptom disappearance time and intraoperative blood loss in the observation group were less than those in the control group(P<0.05).The incidence of complications in the observation group was lower than that in the control group(P<0.05).The single treatment cost of the observation group was lower than that of the control group(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in total effective rate between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion Electronic gastroscope assisted injection of laurogol hardener the treatment of internal hemorrhoids has the advantages of quick postoperative recovery,less complications and low cost.