切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (01) : 27 -29. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2020.01.007

所属专题: 文献

临床论著

负压引流措施对腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术后临床血清肿发生率的影响
王维1,(), 郭文静2   
  1. 1. 017000 内蒙古,鄂尔多斯市第二人民医院外科
    2. 017000 内蒙古,鄂尔多斯市中心医院肿瘤科
  • 收稿日期:2019-04-01 出版日期:2020-02-18
  • 通信作者: 王维

Effect of negative pressure drainage on the incidence of seroma following laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair

Wei Wang1,(), Wenjing Guo2   

  1. 1. Department of Surgery, the Second People's Hospital of Ordos, Inner Mongolia 017000, China
  • Received:2019-04-01 Published:2020-02-18
  • Corresponding author: Wei Wang
引用本文:

王维, 郭文静. 负压引流措施对腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术后临床血清肿发生率的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(01): 27-29.

Wei Wang, Wenjing Guo. Effect of negative pressure drainage on the incidence of seroma following laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2020, 14(01): 27-29.

目的

探讨负压引流管对减少腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术(TAPP)患者术后血清肿发生率的影响。

方法

收集2017年2月至2018年2月,鄂尔多斯市第二人民医院接受TAPP术式的成人单侧腹股沟疝患者50例。引流组患者26例,将十字形负压引流管放置于疝补片与腹膜之间,经过腹膜外从同侧戳卡孔引出接负压;对照组患者24例,未放置引流管。对比分析引流组与对照组患者的手术时间、术后住院时间、术后血清肿发生率。

结果

50例患者中直疝11例、斜疝39例。引流组平均手术时间[(69.04±3.49)min]较对照组[(64.38±3.41)min]长,但差异无统计学意义(P=0.345)。引流组术后平均住院时间与对照组相仿[(1.69±0.09)d vs(1.71±0.09)d],差异无统计学意义(P=0.904)。术后短期(2 d),引流组的血清肿发生率明显低于对照组[2(7.69%)vs 8(33.33%)],差异有统计学意义(P=0.032);引流组与对照组术后长期(7、14 d)的血清肿发生率比较,差异无统计学意义[7 d:2(7.69%)vs 5(20.83%),P=0.181;14 d:0 vs 1(4.17%),P=0.302]。

结论

负压引流可减少TAPP术后早期血清肿的发生,对长期血清肿的发生无明显影响。

Objective

Our research was to evaluate whether negative pressure drainage could reduce seroma incidence in patient receiving laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair.

Methods

The clinical data of 50 cases of patients with unilateral hernia admitted to the Second People's Hospital of Ordos from Feb. 2017 to Feb. 2018 were collected and assigned to either drainage group (26 cases) or control group (24 cases). A cross-type negative pressure drainage tube was placed between the mesh and peritoneum only in the drainage group patients before peritoneum suture. The data of operative time, hospitalized stay and post-operative seroma incidence was collected and analyzed statistically in the drainage group and the control group.

Results

Of all 50 cases, 11 patients were direct inguinal hernia and 39 were indirect inguinal hernia. The average operative time was longer in the drainage group (69.04±3.49) minutes than that in the control group (64.38±3.41) minutes, however, without significance (P=0.345). The hospitalized stay were similar in both groups (drainage group vs control group: 1.69±0.09 days vs 1.71±0.09 days; P=0.904). But the post-operative seroma incidence was significantly lower in the drainage group [7.69% (2/26)] than in the control group [33.33% (8/24)] in short-term period (2 days) after TAPP surgery (P=0.032). While there was no significance in long-term period (7 days, 14 days) of comparison between the drainage group and control group after surgery [(7 days: drainage vs control: 7.69% (2/26) vs 20.83% (5/24), P=0.181; 14 days: drainage vs control: 0 (0/26) vs 4.17% (1/24), P=0.302].

Conclusion

Negative pressure drainage can reduce the incidence of early post-operative seroma in TAPP repair, while there is no significant effect on long-term post-operative seroma.

表1 引流组与对照组单侧腹股沟疝男性患者一般资料比较
[1]
李健文,王明刚,唐健雄, 等. 腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术规范化操作指南[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2013, 33(7): 566-570.
[2]
李俊生,邵翔宇,程韬, 等. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝术后浆液肿的预防措施[J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(1): 1-4.
[3]
Cihan A, Ozdemir H, Uçan BH, et al. Fade or fate. Seroma in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair[J]. Surg Endosc, 2006, 20(2): 325-328.
[4]
Ferzli GS, Kiel T. The role of the endoscopic extraperitoneal approach in large inguinal scrotal hernias[J]. Surg Endosc, 1997, 11(3): 299-302.
[5]
Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Camps J, Cornet DA, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. Results of a multicenter trial[J]. Ann Surg, 1995, 221(1): 3-13.
[6]
Lau H, Lee F. Seroma following endoscopic extraperitonealinguinal hernioplasty[J]. Surg Endosc, 2003, 17(11): 1773-1777.
[7]
Reddy VM, Sutton CD, Bloxham L, et al. Laparoscopic repair of direct inguinal hernia: a new technique that reduces the development of postoperative seroma[J]. Hernia, 2007, 11(5): 393-396.
[8]
Birch DW. Characterizing laparoscopic incisional hernia repair[J]. Can J Surg, 2007, 50(3): 195-201.
[9]
Muysoms F, Campanelli G, Champault GG, et al. EuraHS: the development of an international online platform for registration and outcome measurement of ventral abdominal wall hernia repair[J]. Hernia, 2012, 16(3): 239-250.
[10]
曾玉剑,孙亮,施承民, 等. 经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术618例[J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 8(5): 409-411.
[11]
Robinson TN, Clarke JH, Schoen J, et al. Major mesh-related complication following hernia repair: events reported to the Food and Drug Administration[J]. Surg Endosc, 2005, 19(12): 1556-1560.
[12]
纪光伟,吴志远,王旭, 等. 高频电刀对腹部切口愈合影响的实验和临床研究[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2002, 82(17): 1199-1202.
[13]
Novik B, Hagedorn S, Mork UB, et al. Fibrin glue for securing the mesh in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a study with a 40-month prospective follow-up period[J]. Surg Endosc, 2006, 20(3): 462-467.
[14]
司仙科,李炜,杨佳华, 等. 负压引流在腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术后减少血清肿的临床应用[J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(1): 30-33.
[15]
吴日钊,隋梁,李亮. 开放式双侧腹股沟疝腹膜前修补术防治血清肿的临床研究[J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2011, 5(8): 282-288.
[1] 吴畏, 吴永哲, 李宗倍, 崔宏力, 李华志, 许臣. 轻质大网孔补片腹腔镜下疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的疗效及炎症因子的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 70-73.
[2] 曹迪, 张玉茹. 经腹腔镜生物补片修补直肠癌根治术后盆底疝1例[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 115-116.
[3] 孟飞龙, 华帅, 张莹, 路广海. 经脐单孔腹腔镜后鞘后入路在全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中的应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 658-660.
[4] 孔博, 张璟, 吕珂. 超声技术在复杂腹壁疝诊治中的作用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 670-673.
[5] 张起尧, 刘子文. 复杂腹壁疝的解剖和生物力学基础[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 674-676.
[6] 邢晓伟, 刘雨辰, 赵冰, 王明刚. 基于术前腹部CT的卷积神经网络对腹壁切口疝术后复发预测价值[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 677-681.
[7] 毛永欢, 仝瀚文, 缪骥, 王行舟, 沈晓菲, 喻春钊. 造口旁疝危险因素预测模型构建[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 682-687.
[8] 叶晋生, 路夷平, 梁燕凯, 于淼, 冀祯, 贺志坚, 张洪海, 王洁. 腹腔镜下应用生物补片修补直肠术后盆底缺损的疗效[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 688-691.
[9] 王可, 范彬, 李多富, 刘奎. 两种疝囊残端处理方法在经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术中的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 692-696.
[10] 袁伟, 张修稳, 潘宏波, 章军, 王虎, 黄敏. 平片式与填充式腹股沟疝修补术的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 697-701.
[11] 夏松, 姚嗣会, 汪勇刚. 经腹腹膜前与疝环充填式疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的对照研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 702-705.
[12] 姜明, 罗锐, 龙成超. 闭孔疝的诊断与治疗:10年73例患者诊疗经验总结[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 706-710.
[13] 刘跃刚, 薛振峰. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝日间手术在老年患者中的安全性分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 711-714.
[14] 杨瑞洲, 李国栋, 吴向阳. 腹股沟疝术后感染的治疗方法探讨[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 715-719.
[15] 徐金林, 陈征. 抗菌药物临床应用监测对腹股沟疝修补术预防用药及感染的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 720-723.
阅读次数
全文


摘要