切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版)

中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (05) : 493 -496. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2020.05.007

所属专题： 文献；

临床论著

腹膜前引流对腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术患者术后血肿及血清肿的影响
居建明1,†(), 于国锋1   
  1. 1. 215101　江苏省苏州市中西医结合医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-15 出版日期:2020-10-20
  • 通信作者: 居建明

Effect of preperitoneal drainage on postoperative hematoma and seroma in patients undergoing laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair: A prospective randomized controlled study

Jianming Ju1,†(), Guofeng Yu1   

  1. 1. General surgery Department, Suzhou Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Suzhou 215101, China
  • Received:2019-06-15 Published:2020-10-20
  • Corresponding author: Jianming Ju
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

居建明, 于国锋. 腹膜前引流对腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术患者术后血肿及血清肿的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(05): 493-496.

Jianming Ju, Guofeng Yu. Effect of preperitoneal drainage on postoperative hematoma and seroma in patients undergoing laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair: A prospective randomized controlled study[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2020, 14(05): 493-496.

目的

探讨腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（TAPP）放置腹膜前引流对术后血肿及血清肿的影响。

方法

选取2016年6月至2018年5月，江苏省苏州市中西医结合医院收治的单侧腹股沟疝患者90例，随机分为试验组和对照组，2组患者均行TAPP手术。试验组放置腹膜前引流管，对照组不放置引流管。收集2组患者的一般资料、手术相关资料及随访资料进行统计学分析，对比2组患者术后血肿及血清肿发生率差异。

结果

全部患者均完成手术及随访。2组患者的一般资料、疝位置、疝分型、手术时间、住院花费、术后住院时间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。2组患者的术后发热发生率、急性疼痛发生率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。试验组术后血肿发生率明显低于对照组（P<0.05），试验组患者术后1和3个月血清肿发生率明显低于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。2组患者1年随访均观察到1例复发的病例，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；随访期内2组患者均未出现感染的病例。

结论

TAPP中，放置腹膜前引流管能够有效降低患者术后血肿和血清肿的发生率，同时并不增加感染和复发风险。

关键词: 疝, 腹股沟, 腹腔镜, 引流, 血肿, 血清肿
Objective

To investigate the effect of peritoneal drainage in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair for postoperative hematoma and seroma.

Methods

A total of 90 patients with unilateral inguinal hernia admitted to Suzhou hospital of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine from June 2016 to May 2018 were selected and randomly divided into experimental group and control group. Both groups underwent TAPP surgery. Preperitoneal drainage tube was placed in the experimental group, while no drainage tube was placed in the control group. The general data, operative related data and follow-up data of the two groups were collected for statistical analysis, and the incidence of postoperative hematoma and seroma was compared between the two groups.

Results

Surgery and follow-up were completed in all patients, and the follow-up rate was 100%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in general data, hernia location, hernia type, operation time, hospitalization cost, and postoperative hospitalization time (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of postoperative fever and acute pain (P>0.05). The incidence of postoperative hematoma in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05), and the incidence of postoperative seroma in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 1 month and 3 months after surgery (P<0.05), with statistically significant differences. One case of recurrence was observed in both groups during 1-year follow-up, and the difference was not statistically significant. There was no case of infection in both groups during the follow-up period.

Conclusion

During laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair, the placement of a preperitoneal drainage tube can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative hematoma and seroma without increasing the risk of infection and recurrence.

Key words: Hernia, inguinal, Laparoscope, Drainage, Hematoma, Seroma
图1 腹膜前间隙放置引流管
表1 2组患者的一般资料对比
组别 例数 性别[例(%)] 年龄(岁, ±s) 体质量指数(kg/m2, ±s) 疝位置[例(%)] 疝分型[例(%)]
男性 女性 左 右 Ⅱ型 Ⅲ型
试验组 45 42(93.33) 3(6.67) 48.71±15.33 19.39±3.01 17(37.78) 28(62.22) 11(24.44) 34(75.56)
对照组 45 41(91.11) 4(8.89) 46.06±13.97 18.77±2.94 19(42.22) 26(57.78) 14(31.11) 31(68.89)
检验值   3.876* -0.119 1.173 4.129* 2.777*
P值   0.377 0.813 0.453 0.589 0.436
表2 2组患者住院相关资料对比（±s）
组别 例数 手术时间(min) 住院花费(元) 术后住院时间(d)
试验组 45 56.78±9.77 9977.34 4.39±1.78
对照组 45 54.65±8.86 9643.28 4.11±1.84
t值   1.102 1.577 0.938
P值   0.303 0.239 0.322
表3 2组患者并发症情况对比[例（%）]
组别 例数 发热 急性疼痛 血肿 血清肿 复发 感染
术后1个月 术后3个月
试验组 45 5(11.11) 4(8.89) 1(2.22) 5(11.11) 2(4.44) 1(2.22) 0
对照组 45 7(15.56) 3(6.67) 8(17.78) 17(37.78) 11(24.44) 1(2.22) 0
χ2值   1.426 2.347 10.113 21.732 18.332 - -
P值   0.209 0.331 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 - -
[1]
Miserez M, Peeters E, Aufenacker T, et al. European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients[J]. Hernia, 2014, 13(3): 443-444.
[2]
Amid PK, Lichtenstein IL. Long-term result and current status of the Lichtenstein open tension-free hernioplasty[J]. Hernia, 1998, 2(2): 89-94.
[3]
Mccormack K, Wake BL, Fraser C, et al. Transabdominal pre-peritoneal(TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal(TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review[J]. Hernia, 2005, 9(2): 109-114.
[4]
Group HS, Ramshorst GV. International guidelines for groin hernia management[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(1): 1-165.
[5]
中华医学会外科学分会疝和腹壁外科学组，陈双. 成人腹股沟疝诊疗指南(2012年版)[J]. 外科理论与实践, 2013, 51(1): 285-287.
[6]
王博智，李廷坚，翁少涛, 等. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后临床血清肿的防治体会[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 8(5): 46-48.
[7]
唐健雄，李绍杰. 我国疝与腹壁外科发展和在新世纪创新挑战[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2020, 40(1): 89-92.
[8]
Köckerling F. TEP for elective primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men: what do we know?[J]. Hernia, 2019, 23(3): 439-459.
[9]
Li J, Shao X, Cheng T. Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal superior and inferior lumbar hernias repair without traumatic fixation: Two case reports[J]. Int J Abdom Wall Hernia Surg, 2019, 2(1): 25-29.
[10]
郭晓，王辰，崔逸峰, 等. 腹股沟疝修补术后放置引流与否对血清肿形成的影响的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(2): 169-173.
[11]
宋伟，王学虎，刘洪, 等. 探讨负压引流对预防腹股沟疝无张力修补术术后感染的有效性[J]. 重庆医科大学学报, 2019, 44(3): 332-335.
[12]
Zhu Y, Liu M, Li J, et al. Closure of direct inguinal hernia defect in laparoscopic hernioplasty to prevent seroma formation: a prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial[J]. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2019, 29(1): 18-21.
[13]
秦兴陆，梁云，史栗丰, 等. 腹腔镜下完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中放置负压引流管的临床体会[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2012(12): 951-953.
[14]
辛乐，叶进军，阎玉矿. 腹腔镜完全腹膜外双侧腹股沟疝修补术中留置负压引流管预防术后血清肿的临床体会[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2018, 23(12): 931-933.
[15]
Bittner R, Arregui ME, Bisgaard T, et al. Guidelines for laparoscopic(TAPP) and endoscopic(TEP) treatment of inguinal Hernia[International Endohernia Society(IEHS)][J]. Surg Endos, 2012, 26(11): 3350-3351.
[1] 燕速, 霍博文. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治性切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 13-13.
[2] 母德安, 李凯, 张志远, 张伟. 超微创器械辅助单孔腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 14-14.
[3] 李国新, 陈新华. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术食管空肠吻合的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-4.
[4] 李子禹, 卢信星, 李双喜, 陕飞. 食管胃结合部腺癌腹腔镜手术重建方式的选择[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 5-8.
[5] 李乐平, 张荣华, 商亮. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治淋巴结清扫策略[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 9-12.
[6] 陈方鹏, 杨大伟, 金从稳. 腹腔镜近端胃癌切除术联合改良食管胃吻合术重建His角对术后反流性食管炎的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 15-18.
[7] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[8] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[9] 任佳, 马胜辉, 王馨, 石秀霞, 蔡淑云. 腹腔镜全胃切除、间置空肠代胃术的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 31-34.
[10] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[11] 奚玲, 仝瀚文, 缪骥, 毛永欢, 沈晓菲, 杜峻峰, 刘晔. 基于肌少症构建的造口旁疝危险因素预测模型[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 48-51.
[12] 李博, 贾蓬勃, 李栋, 李小庆. ERCP与LCBDE治疗胆总管结石继发急性重症胆管炎的效果[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 60-63.
[13] 王庆亮, 党兮, 师凯, 刘波. 腹腔镜联合胆道子镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 313-313.
[14] 杨建辉, 段文斌, 马忠志, 卿宇豪. 腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 314-314.
[15] 叶劲松, 刘驳强, 柳胜君, 吴浩然. 腹腔镜肝Ⅶ+Ⅷ段背侧段切除[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 315-315.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号