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 (04) : 374 -377. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2020.04.013

所属专题: 文献

临床论著

疝环充填式无张力疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝中的应用效果分析
孙衍模1,(), 张文智2, 杨针2   
  1. 1. 572000 海南省,三亚市人民医院肝胆胰外科
    2. 572000 海南三亚,解放军总医院海南分院肝胆胰外科
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-18 出版日期:2020-08-18
  • 通信作者: 孙衍模
  • 基金资助:
    海南省卫生计生行业科研项目(16A200209)

Effect of application of mesh plug hernia repair in the treatment of elderly inguinal hernia

Yanmo Sun1,(), Wenzhi Zhang2, Zhen Yang2   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Sanya People's Hospital, Sanya 572000, Hainan
    2. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Hainan Hospital of PLA General Hospital, Sanya 572000, Hainan
  • Received:2019-06-18 Published:2020-08-18
  • Corresponding author: Yanmo Sun
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Sun Yanmo, Email:
引用本文:

孙衍模, 张文智, 杨针. 疝环充填式无张力疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝中的应用效果分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(04): 374-377.

Yanmo Sun, Wenzhi Zhang, Zhen Yang. Effect of application of mesh plug hernia repair in the treatment of elderly inguinal hernia[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2020, 14(04): 374-377.

目的

探讨疝环充填式无张力疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝治疗中的应用价值。

方法

选取2016年11月至2018年2月,三亚市人民医院接受治疗的老年腹股沟疝患者82例,按随机数字表法将患者分为试验组和对照组,每组41例。对照组行Lichtenstein无张力疝修补术,试验组行疝环充填式无张力疝修补术。比较2组手术相关指标、术后不同时间疼痛程度、术后第1天血清β-内啡肽(β-EP)水平,记录2组并发症及复发情况。

结果

82例患者顺利完成手术及随访,随访率100%,平均随访时间为(12.45±1.14)个月。相较于对照组,试验组术后伤口疼痛持续时间明显缩短(P<0.05),2组手术时间、术中出血量、自主活动时间及住院时间无明显差异(P>0.05)。术后2 h 2组VAS评分均最低,术后2 h至7 d 2组患者VAS评分均先升高后降低,且术后12 h及3 d试验组VAS评分均明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。术后第1天,试验组血清β-EP水平明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。试验组术后急性疼痛发生率明显低于对照组。对照组疝复发1例,试验组无疝复发病例。

结论

疝环充填式无张力疝修补术对老年腹股沟疝患者产生的应激反应更小,可降低术后疼痛程度,并发症少,安全性高。

Objective

To study the application value of mesh plug tension-free hernia repair in the treatment of elderly inguinal hernia.

Methods

82 elderly patients with inguinal hernia who were treated in the Sanya People's Hospital from November 2016 to February 2018 were selected and divided into the experiment group and the control group according to random number table method, with 41 cases in each group. The control group underwent Lichtenstein tension-free hernia repair, and the experiment group underwent mesh plug tension-free hernia repair. The surgical related indexes, degree of pain at different time after operation and the level of serum β-endorphin (β-EP) on the 1st day after the operation were compared between the 2 groups, and the complications and recurrence of the 2 groups were recorded.

Results

All patients successfully completed the operation and follow-up. Compared with the control group, the autonomic activity time of the experiment group significantly advanced, and the duration of wound pain significantly shortened (P<0.05), while there was no significant difference in the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the autonomic activity time and hospitalization time between the two groups (P>0.05). The VAS scores of the 2 groups were the lowest at 2 hours after operation, and the VAS scores of the 2 groups increased first and then decreased from 2 hours to 7 days after operation, the VAS scores of the experiment group were significantly lower than the control group at 12 hours and 3 days after operation (P<0.05). The level of serum β-EP on 1st day after the operation in the experiment group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). The incidence of acute pain in the experiment group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). There was 1 case of recurrence in the control group, and none in the experiment group during the follow-up of 12 months.

Conclusion

The mesh plug tension-free hernia repair has less stress response to elderly patients with inguinal hernia. It can reduce postoperative pain, has less complications and high safety.

表1 2组患者手术相关参数比较(±s
表2 2组患者术后不同时间疼痛视觉模拟评分比较(分,±s
表3 2组患者术后并发症及复发情况比较[例(%)]
[1]
蔡涛,吴锋,刘芳. 腹股沟疝修补术应用腹腔镜与开腹手术的临床效果比较(附120例报告)[J]. 贵州医药, 2015, 39(1): 37-39.
[2]
Song B, Liu D, Liu S, et al. Efficacy comparison of laparoscopic versus open tension-free hernia repair using biologic mesh for inguinal strangulated hernia[J]. Chin J Gastrointest Surg, 2015, 18(11): 1088-1091.
[3]
贺家勇,杨晨晨,李义亮, 等. 腹腔镜下腹股沟疝前间隙修补术、无张力疝修补术与传统疝修补术临床疗效比较[J]. 新疆医科大学学报, 2015, 38(9): 1146-1150.
[4]
陈康,王光远,郎庆华, 等. 局麻下无张力疝修补术在基层医院开展的可行性[J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(1): 71-73.
[5]
李亮. 实用腹股沟疝外科学[M]. 西安: 世界图书出版西安有限公司, 2014: 121-123.
[6]
Sabuncuoglu MZ, Dandin O, Piskin T. What should be the correct indications for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair?[J]. Surg Endosc, 2014, 28(5): 1748-1749.
[7]
孙雪峰. 腹膜外腹腔镜疝气修补术与传统疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的疗效对比分析[J]. 河北医科大学学报, 2015, 36(6): 703-705.
[8]
黄涛,陈娟,招婷. 无张力修补术和传统手术治疗腹外疝的临床效果对比分析[J]. 锦州医科大学学报, 2016, 10(1): 50-52.
[9]
孙刚,赵英男,李冬, 等. 腹股沟疝传统疝修补术、平片及疝环填充无张力疝修补术的临床研究[J]. 临床军医杂志, 2015, 43(4): 348-350.
[10]
Aguilar-García J, Cano-González H A, Martínez-Jiménez M A, et al. Unilateral Lichtenstein tension-free mesh hernia repair and testicular perfusion: a prospective control study[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(3): 479-482.
[11]
邹海明. 疝环充填式无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的临床效果[J]. 临床合理用药杂志, 2017, 10(12): 149-150.
[12]
Yenli E M T, Abanga J, Tabiri S, et al. Our Experience with the Use of Low Cost Mesh in Tension-Free Inguinal Hernioplasty in Northern Ghana[J]. Ghana Med J, 2017, 51(2): 78-82.
[13]
黄壮生,吴俊伟,李颖. 疝环充填与平片无张力修补术治疗腹股沟斜疝的对比[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2015, 31(22): 3727-3729.
[14]
方勇,姜双,印慨, 等. 腹膜前无张力疝修补术对比传统加强腹股沟后壁疝修补术的优势分析[J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(2): 62-65.
[1] 李凤仪, 李若凡, 高旭, 张超凡. 目标导向液体干预对老年胃肠道肿瘤患者术后血流动力学、胃肠功能恢复的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 29-32.
[2] 晏晴艳, 雍晓梅, 罗洪, 杜敏. 成都地区老年转移性乳腺癌的预后及生存因素研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 636-638.
[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] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 于智慧, 赵建军. 后路腰方肌阻滞复合全身麻醉在腹股沟斜疝经腹腹膜前手术中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 734-739.
[11] 田静, 方秀春. 超声引导下横筋膜平面阻滞在儿童腹股沟疝手术的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 740-744.
[12] 李静如, 王江玲, 吴向阳. 简易负压引流在腹股沟疝术后浅部感染中的疗效分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 745-749.
[13] 王红艳, 马艳丽, 郑洁灿. 手术室综合护理在腹股沟疝手术中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 755-758.
[14] 姜里蛟, 张峰, 周玉萍. 多学科诊疗模式救治老年急性非静脉曲张性上消化道大出血患者的临床观察[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 520-524.
[15] 郭震天, 张宗明, 赵月, 刘立民, 张翀, 刘卓, 齐晖, 田坤. 机器学习算法预测老年急性胆囊炎术后住院时间探索[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 955-961.
阅读次数
全文


摘要