腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术日间手术模式的临床效益评价

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.01.005

目的

比较日间手术模式和住院手术模式在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的临床效益。

方法

选取2017年1～12月昆明医科大学第二附属医院就诊的120例单侧腹股沟疝患者作为研究对象。将所有患者按照随机数字表法随机分成日间手术模式组和住院手术模式组，各60例。观察2组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床活动时间、尿潴留发生率、阴囊积液发生率、异物感发生率、总并发症发生率、医疗费用及满意度。

结果

所有患者均顺利完成手术，半年随访期内无复发。日间手术模式组与住院手术模式组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床活动时间、尿潴留发生率、阴囊积液发生率、异物感发生率、总并发症发生率比较，差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。日间手术组患者住院时间要明显比住院手术组患者短，日间手术组患者总住院费比住院手术组患者低，日间手术组患者对治疗过程满意程度明显高于对照组患者，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。

结论

日间手术模式下行腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术安全有效，且可降低总费用，加快周转率，提高了医疗资源的利用率，提高了患者的满意度。

关键词: 腹腔镜, 疝，腹股沟, 疝修补术, 日间手术, 住院手术, 效益评价, 随机对照试验

Objective

To compare the clinical benefits of laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy between day surgery mode and inpatient surgery mode.

Methods

A total of 120 cases of unilateral inguinal hernia who treated in Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from January 2017 to December 2017 were collected prospectively, and they were randomly divided into 2 groups: day surgery group (60 cases) and inpatient surgery group (60 cases). The operative time, blood loss, postoperative ambulation time, incidence of urinary retention, incidence of scrotal effusion, incidence of foreign body sensation, incidence of total complications, medical expenses and satisfaction between the two groups were compared.

Results

The operation was successfully completed in both groups. No recurrence was found during 6 months follow-up. There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative ambulation time, incidence of urinary retention, incidence of scrotal effusion, incidence of foreign body sensation, and incidence of total complications between the two groups (P>0.05). However, the duration of hospitalization in the day surgery group was shorter than that in the inpatient surgery group (P<0.05). The total cost of hospitalization in the day surgery group was lower than that in the inpatient surgery group (P<0.05), and the score of satisfaction in the day surgery group was significantly better than that in the inpatient surgery group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy in the day surgery mode is safe and effective, and can reduce the total cost, speed up turnover rate, improve the utilization of medical resources, and improve patient satisfaction.

Key words: Laparoscopes, Hernia, inguinal, Herniorrhaphy, Day surgery, Inpatient surgery, Benefits analysis, Randomized

表1 2组患者的临床资料比较

临床资料		日间手术(60例)	住院手术组(60例)	P值
年龄(岁, ±s)		38.58±1.78	40.28±1.23	>0.05
性别(例)				>0.05
	男性	53	52
	女性	7	8
病程(年, ±s)		4.58±1.02	5.10±1.21	>0.05
疝分型(例)				>0.05
	Ⅰ型	8	9
	Ⅱ型	34	36
	Ⅲ型	18	15
疝类型(例)				>0.05
	直疝	7	9
	斜疝	53	51

表1 2组患者的临床资料比较

临床资料		日间手术(60例)	住院手术组(60例)	P值
年龄(岁, ±s)		38.58±1.78	40.28±1.23	>0.05
性别(例)				>0.05
	男性	53	52
	女性	7	8
病程(年, ±s)		4.58±1.02	5.10±1.21	>0.05
疝分型(例)				>0.05
	Ⅰ型	8	9
	Ⅱ型	34	36
	Ⅲ型	18	15
疝类型(例)				>0.05
	直疝	7	9
	斜疝	53	51

表2 2组患者疗效和经济指标比较

指标	日间手术组(60例)	住院手术组(60例)	P值
TAPP/TEP(例)	41/19	40/20	>0.05
手术时间(min, ±s)	31.0±5.2	32.0±6.1	>0.05
术中出血量(ml, ±s)	5.0±1.8	5.1±1.3	>0.05
并发症(例)	8	9	>0.05
尿潴留(例)	2	3	>0.05
阴囊积液(例)	3	4	>0.05
异物感(例)	3	2	>0.05
复发(例)	0	0	>0.05
术后下床活动时间(h, ±s)	0.82±0.10	1.15±0.14
住院时间(d, ±s)	1.50±0	7.56±0.22	<0.05
总费用(元, ±s)	7 626.21±35.32	9 671.31±48.45	<0.05
满意度评分(分, ±s)	5.37±0.96	3.82±0.85	<0.05

表2 2组患者疗效和经济指标比较

指标	日间手术组(60例)	住院手术组(60例)	P值
TAPP/TEP(例)	41/19	40/20	>0.05
手术时间(min, ±s)	31.0±5.2	32.0±6.1	>0.05
术中出血量(ml, ±s)	5.0±1.8	5.1±1.3	>0.05
并发症(例)	8	9	>0.05
尿潴留(例)	2	3	>0.05
阴囊积液(例)	3	4	>0.05
异物感(例)	3	2	>0.05
复发(例)	0	0	>0.05
术后下床活动时间(h, ±s)	0.82±0.10	1.15±0.14
住院时间(d, ±s)	1.50±0	7.56±0.22	<0.05
总费用(元, ±s)	7 626.21±35.32	9 671.31±48.45	<0.05
满意度评分(分, ±s)	5.37±0.96	3.82±0.85	<0.05

[1]	Chen LS, Chen WC, Kang YN, et al. Effects of transabdominal preperitoneal and totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: an update systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Surg Endosc, 2019, 33(2): 418-428.
[2]	Li J, Zhang W. Comment to: Laparoscopic extraperitoneal repair versus open inguinal hernia repair: 20-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial[J]. Hernia, 2017, 21(6): 989.
[3]	Pónusz R, Endrei D, Kovács D, et al. Analysis of the utilization of one-day surgery in Hungary[J]. Orv Hetil, 2019, 160(17): 670-678.
[4]	Dahlberg K, Philipsson A, Hagberg L, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a systematic e-assessed follow-up of postoperative recovery after day surgery: a multicentre randomized trial[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2017, 119(5): 1039-1046.
[5]	Gilmartin J, Wright K. The nurse's role in day surgery: a literature review[J]. Int Nurs Rev, 2007, 54(2): 183-190.
[6]	Steger U, Bisping M, Urban J, et al. Day surgery for endoscopic inguinal hernia repair[J]. Zentralbl Chir, 2019, 144(1): 26-31.
[7]	陈浩，姚琪远. 腹股沟疝日间手术体系标准建立及常见问题处理[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2017, 37(11): 1296-1297.
[8]	中华医学会外科学分会疝和腹壁外科学组. 成人腹股沟疝、股疝和腹部手术切口疝手术治疗方案(2003年修订稿)[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2004, 42(14): 834-835.
[9]	Yan D, Hongsheng M. Current status of day surgery care development in China[J]. West China Med J, 2015, 30(5): 801-803.
[10]	孙立，陈杰，申英末. 老年腹股沟疝日间手术注意事项[J]. 中国实用外科杂志2018, 38(8): 873-876.
[11]	Cadariu F, Enache A, Avram M, et al. Day surgery in Romania[J]. Ann Ital Chir, 2017, 88: 567-571.
[12]	Hanley SC, Steinmetz O, Mathieu ES, et al. Safety and feasibility of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair as day surgery[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2018, 67(6): 1709-1715.
[13]	Strong B, Sainsbury D, Hodgkinson P, et al. Aesthetic day surgery safety in a UK facility: A 4 year retrospective study and discussion of the literature[J]. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 2018, 71(5): 769-770.
[14]	Hao XY, Shen YF, Wei YG, et al. Safety and effectiveness of day-surgery laparoscopic cholecystectomy is still uncertain: meta-analysis of eight randomized controlled trials based on GRADE approach[J]. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31(12): 4950-4963.
[15]	Guttadauro A, Maternini M, Lo Bianco G, et al. 15 years experience in proctological day-surgery[J]. Ann Ital Chir, 2018, 89: 324-329.

[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]	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.
[11]	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.
[12]	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.
[13]	郭兵, 王万里, 何凯, 黄汉生. 腹腔镜下肝门部胆管癌根治术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 143-143.
[14]	李凯, 陈淋, 苏怀东, 向涵, 张伟. 超微创器械在改良单孔腹腔镜巨大肝囊肿开窗引流及胆囊切除中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 144-144.
[15]	魏丽霞, 张安澜, 周宝勇, 李明. 腹腔镜下Ⅲb型肝门部胆管癌根治术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 145-145.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Clinical benefits analysis of day surgery for laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

Clinical benefits analysis of day surgery for laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy