三种疝修补术疗效比较和对复发率影响.docVIP

三种疝修补术疗效比较和对复发率影响[摘要] 目的 比较分析腹腔镜疝修补术、无张力疝修补术与传统疝修补术的疗效。 方法 选取我院2009年1月～2012年1月接受传统疝修补术的腹股沟疝患者50例，设立为A组，另选择同期行无张力修补术的腹股沟疝患者50例，设立为B组以及同期行腹腔镜疝修补术的50例，设立为C组。 结果 C组手术时间最短，下床活动时间最早，平均住院时间最短，平均住院费用最多。A组手术时间最长，下床活动时间最晚，平均住院时间最长，平均住院费用最低，各组间比较差异有统计学意义（F = 2.156、5.236、3.537、10.7836，P 0.05）。A组术后发生尿潴留、阴囊血肿、切口感染的例数明显多于B组，而C组无一例发生尿潴留、阴囊血肿、切口感染。随访1～3年，A组复发率最高，明显高于B组、C组，差异有统计学意义（P 0.05）。 结论 腹腔镜疝修补术、无张力疝修补术与传统疝修补术各具优缺点，手术应根据疝的类型、疝环和耻骨肌孔缺大小、周围腹横筋膜薄弱程度等具体情况并兼顾患者个体的差异来选择合理的修补方式。 [关键词] 腹腔镜疝修补术；无张力疝修补术；传统疝修补术 [中图分类号] R615 [文献标识码] B [文章编号] 1673—9701（2012）27—0035—02 Laparoscopic hernia repair， tension—free hernia repair and traditional hernia repair： efficacy comparative study SHEN Binbin XU Luping Surgery Clinic， Jiaxing City No.1 Hospital， Jiaxing 314000，China [Abstract] Objective To compare the analysis of laparoscopic hernia repair， tension—free hernioplasty with the efficacy of traditional hernia repair. Methods From January 2009 to January 2012， fifty cases of our hospital accepted the traditional hernia repair， inguinal hernia patients， the establishment of group A， and the other 50 cases of concomitant tension—free repair of inguinal hernia patients， the establishment of group B ， and concomitant laparoscopic hernia repair 50 cases， was set up for the C group. Results The shortest operative time of group C， to get out of bed the earliest， the shortest average length of stay， average hospital costs up to. Group A surgical longest time， get out of bed time at the latest， the average length of stay the longest average length of stay of the lowest cost among the three groups， the difference was statistically significant （F = 2.156， 5.236， 3.537， 10.7836， P 0.05）. Group A， postoperative urinary retention， scrotal hematoma， wound infection cases significantly more than group B and group C and no case of urinary retention， scrotal hematoma， wound infection， were followed up for 1—3 years， the recurrence rate of group A， significantly than in group B and group C， the differ