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) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (03) : 281 -284. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.03.017

临床论著

腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术与腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝中的应用价值及对呼吸功能的影响
张顺1, 蒋正2,(), 陈兆丰1   
  1. 1. 231500 安徽省,庐江县人民医院胃肠外科
    2. 230000 合肥,安徽省立医院南区急诊外科
  • 收稿日期:2019-12-28 出版日期:2021-06-18
  • 通信作者: 蒋正

Application value and influence on respiratory function of TEP and TAPP surgical procedure in elderly patients with inguinal hernia

Shun Zhang1, Zheng Jiang2,(), Zhaofeng Chen1   

  1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Lujiang People's Hospital, Lujiang 231500, China
    2. Department of Emergency Surgery, Anhui Provincial Hospital Southern District, Hefei 230000, China
  • Received:2019-12-28 Published:2021-06-18
  • Corresponding author: Zheng Jiang
引用本文:

张顺, 蒋正, 陈兆丰. 腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术与腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝中的应用价值及对呼吸功能的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(03): 281-284.

Shun Zhang, Zheng Jiang, Zhaofeng Chen. Application value and influence on respiratory function of TEP and TAPP surgical procedure in elderly patients with inguinal hernia[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(03): 281-284.

目的

探究腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术(TEP)与腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术(TAPP)手术方式在老年腹股沟疝中的应用价值及对呼吸功能的影响。

方法

选取2018年2月至2019年8月,庐江县人民医院腹股沟疝老年患者90例,按照手术方式分为TEP组和TAPP组,每组45例。比较2组患者手术效果、呼吸功能、术后复发、慢性疼痛及并发症的发生情况。

结果

TAPP组的患者恢复正常活动时间显著高于TEP组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组患者建立气腹后10(T1)、30(T2)、60(T3)、90 min(T4)的呼吸末二氧化碳分压(PETCO2)、气道分压(Paw)较建立气腹前(T0)均升高,且TEP组气腹后T1、T2、T3、T4的PETCO2、Paw均高于TAPP组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组患者手术时间、住院费用、术中出血量、视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS)、术后住院时间、复发及并发症、术后慢性疼痛的发生情况差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

TEP与TAPP对老年腹股沟疝均有良好的治疗效果,TEP在促进术后恢复方面具有优势,但对老年患者术中呼吸功能影响更为明显。

Objective

To investigate the application value and effect of laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernia repair(TEP) and laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair (TAPP) on the respiratory function under general anesthesia in elderly patients with inguinal hernia.

Methods

90 elderly patients with inguinal hernia admitted to Lujiang People's Hospital were selected and divided into the TEP group and the TAPP group according to surgical methods, with 45 cases in each group. The operation effect, respiratory function, postoperative recurrence, chronic pain and complications were compared between the two groups.

Results

The duration for patients to resume normal activities in the TAPP group were significantly higher than those in the TEP group, with statistical differences (P<0.05). The levels of end-of-breath carbon dioxide partial pressure (PETCO2) and airway partial pressure (Paw) at 10 min (T1), 30 min (T2), 60 min (T3) and 90 min (T4) after pneumoperitoneum in the two groups were higher than those before pneumoperitoneum was established (T0), and the levels of PETCO2 and Paw at T1, T2, T3 and T4 in the TEP group were higher than those in the TAPP group, with statistical differences (P<0.05). There were no statistical differences between the two groups in operation time, hospitalization expenses, intraoperative blood loss, and the score of visual analogue pain (VAS), postoperative hospital stay, recurrence and complications, and occurrence of postoperative chronic pain (P>0.05).

Conclusion

TEP and TAPP have good therapeutic effects on elderly inguinal hernia. TEP has advantages in promoting postoperative recovery, but it has more obvious influence on respiratory function.

表1 2组患者手术效果比较(±s
表2 2组患者不同时间点呼吸功能比较(±s
表3 2组患者复发及并发症比较(例)
表4 2组患者慢性疼痛比较(例)
[1]
Wakasugi M, Tei M, Anno K, et al. Single-incision totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair is safe and feasible in elderly patients: A single-center experience of 365 procedures[J]. Asian J Endosc Surg, 2016, 9(4): 281-284.
[2]
孙少川,孙中伟. 腔镜腹股沟疝术式选择: TAPP vs TEP[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2016, 21(2): 85-87.
[3]
陈茜,丁芳,陈永权. 不同腹腔镜手术二氧化碳(CO2)气腹对患者呼吸动力学的影响[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2014, 20(4): 352-355.
[4]
杨慧琪,刘敏,申英末. 2018年国际腹股沟疝指南解读:成人腹股沟疝管理(一)[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(5): 321-325.
[5]
de Jong AE, Bremer M, Hofland HW, et al. The visual analogue thermometer and the graphic numeric rating scale: a comparison of self-report instruments for pain measurement in adults with burns[J]. Burns, 2015, 41(2): 333-340.
[6]
杨孙虎,侯军丽,阿不都斯木, 等. 腹腔镜手术时CO2气腹和体位对老年直肠癌患者循环功能的影响[J]. 中国普外基础与临床杂志, 2015, 22(3): 331-334.
[7]
刘英姿,张靓,刘平, 等. 腹腔镜手术和开腹手术治疗巨大子宫肌瘤的临床对比研究[J]. 河北医学, 2014, 20(12): 2009-2012.
[8]
付健,唐博,孙建明, 等. 自固定补片在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术与开放式无张力腹股沟疝修补术中的临床对照研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(6): 437-440.
[9]
Alexey VA, Bashankaev B. Laparoscopic round ligament preserving repair for groin hernia in women: A critical appraisal[J]. Int J Abdom Wall Hernia Surg, 2019, 2: 130.
[10]
Scheuermann U, Niebisch S, Lyros O, et al. Transabdominal Preperitoneal(TAPP) versus Lichtenstein operation for primary inguinal hernia repair-A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. BMC Surg, 2017, 17(1): 55.
[11]
晁延军,李英,马富平, 等. 免气腹与CO2气腹在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的临床对照研究[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2015, 8(3): 209-213.
[12]
廉伟,孙静林,刘彦涛. 不同气腹压对小儿腹腔镜手术PETCO2、MAP及心率的影响[J]. 陕西医学杂志, 2017, 46(9): 1185-1187.
[13]
陈胜平,谷春伟. TEP与TAPP治疗腹股沟疝的临床评价[J]. 中国现代普通外科进展, 2015, 18(9): 736-737+740.
[14]
曾国祥,黄文伟,黄修仿. TAPP与Lichtenstein术治疗成人腹股沟复发疝的疗效对比[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(5): 387-389.
[15]
王明刚,李航宇. 关于老年腹股沟疝患者围手术期并发症的思考[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2018, 27(10): 1215-1219.
[16]
Banki F, Kaushik C, Roife D, et al. Laparoscopic Repair of Large Hiatal Hernia Without the Need for Esophageal Lengthening With Low Morbidity and Rare Symptomatic Recurrence[J]. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2017, 29(3): 418-425.
[17]
杜俊义,李铁军,王佾, 等. 成人腹股沟疝腹腔镜下经腹腹膜前与完全腹膜外疝修补术的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 8(5): 455-457.
[18]
傅厚丰,符敏,杨河, 等. 腹腔镜下经腹腹膜前疝无张力修补术与传统术式治疗腹股沟疝患者近期效果比较[J]. 中国医药, 2019, 14(12): 1851-1853.
[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