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) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (02) : 176 -179. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2022.02.011

临床论著

自制中药包加压理疗裤在预防和控制腹腔镜疝修补后并发症的临床研究
刁肇坤1, 史丽敏1, 杨珂佳1, 张有福1,†()   
  1. 1. 030012　太原，山西省中医药研究院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2021-10-19 出版日期:2022-04-18
  • 通信作者: 张有福
  • 基金资助:
    山西省重点研发计划项目基金(201803D31194)

Clinical application study of self-made Chinese medicine package compression physiotherapy pants on the prevention and control of complications after laparoscopic hernia repair

Zhaokun Diao1, Limin Shi1, Kejia Yang1, Youfu Zhang1,†()   

  1. 1. Department of General Surgery, Shanxi Province Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Taiyuan 030012, China
  • Received:2021-10-19 Published:2022-04-18
  • Corresponding author: Youfu Zhang
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

刁肇坤, 史丽敏, 杨珂佳, 张有福. 自制中药包加压理疗裤在预防和控制腹腔镜疝修补后并发症的临床研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(02): 176-179.

Zhaokun Diao, Limin Shi, Kejia Yang, Youfu Zhang. Clinical application study of self-made Chinese medicine package compression physiotherapy pants on the prevention and control of complications after laparoscopic hernia repair[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(02): 176-179.

目的

分析自制中药包加压理疗裤在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后并发症的防治效果。

方法

收集2019年8月至2021年8月山西省中医药研究院普外科收治的腹股沟疝患者128例，按照随机数字表法，随机分为对照组和试验组，每组患者64例。2组患者均接受腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术。对照组术后于腹股沟区沙袋加压并穿戴传统疝气带。试验组术后穿戴我科自制中药包加压理疗裤。对比2组临床指标及并发症发生情况。

结果

试验组术后疼痛视觉模拟评分较对照组低，住院时间较对照组短，PZB服务质量量表评分较对照组高（P<0.05）。术后24 h及7 d，试验组血肿及血清肿发生率、阴囊肿胀及阴囊血肿发生率低于对照组（P<0.05）。术后30 d，2组血肿及血清肿发生率、阴囊肿胀及阴囊血肿发生率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。

结论

腹腔镜腹股沟修补术后穿戴中药包加压理疗裤可减轻疼痛程度，降低血肿、血清肿及阴囊肿胀等术后并发症发生率，缩短住院时间，提高干预满意度。

关键词: 疝，腹股沟, 中医外治法, 加压理疗裤, 腹腔镜, 并发症
Objective

To analyze the effect of self-made Chinese medicine package compression physiotherapy pants on the prevention and treatment of complications after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

Methods

A total of 128 patients with inguinal hernia admitted to the Department of General Surgery of Shanxi Province Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine from August 2019 to August 2021 were collected and were randomly divided into control group and experimental group according to the random number table method, with 64 patients in each group. Both groups of patients underwent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. In the control group, the groin area was pressurized with sandbags and traditional hernia belts were worn after the operation. The experimental group wore our department's self-made Chinese medicine package compression physiotherapy pants after the operation. The clinical indicators and complications of the two groups were compared.

Results

Compared with the control group, the experimental group had a lower postoperative VAS score, shorter hospital stay, and a higher PZB service quality score (P<0.05). 24 hours and 7 days after operation, the incidence of hematoma and seroma, scrotal swelling and scrotal hematoma were lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of hematoma and seroma, scrotal swelling and scrotal hematoma between the two groups 30 days after operation (P>0.05).

Conclusion

After laparoscopic inguinal repair, wearing our self-made traditional Chinese medicine package compression physiotherapy pants can reduce the degree of pain, reduce the incidence of postoperative complications such as hematoma, seroma, and scrotum swelling, shorten the hospital stay, and improve intervention satisfaction.

Key words: Hernia, Inguinal, External treatment of TCM, Compression physiotherapy pants, Laparoscopes, Complications
表1 2组一般资料比较
变量 对照组(64例) 试验组(64例) P值
性别[例(%)]     1
  男性 62(96.88) 62(96.88)  
  女性 2(3.12) 2(3.12)  
年龄(岁, ±s) 61.92±16.37 60.17±18.10 0.535
病程(年, ±s) 4.87±8.83 2.80±4.28 0.952
体质量指数(kg/m2, ±s) 24.03±2.81 24.48±3.40 0.418
疝位置     0.285
  单侧 54(84.37) 58(90.62)  
  双侧 10(15.63) 6(9.38)  
疝缺损大小[例(%)]     0.273
  >3 cm 27(42.18) 21(32.81)  
  ≤3 cm 37(57.82) 43(67.19)  
ASA评分[例(%)]     0.372
  Ⅰ级 39(60.94) 34(53.13)  
  Ⅱ级 25(39.06) 30(46.87)  
手术方式[例(%)]     0.365
  TAPP 14(21.87) 10(15.62)  
  TEP 50(78.13) 54(84.38)  
手术时间(min, ±s) 43.36±4.23 43.23±5.54 0.886
表2 2组临床观察指标比较
变量 对照组(64例) 试验组(64例) P值
VAS评分(分, ±s)      
  24 h 6.77±1.44 5.22±1.66 <0.001
  7 d 2.13±1.45 1.25±1.10 0.001
  30 d 0.41±0.79 0.28±0.52 0.753
血肿和血清肿[例(%)]      
  24 h 46(71.88) 26(40.63) <0.001
  7 d 21(32.81) 8(12.50) 0.006
  30 d 2(3.12) 1(1.56) 0.559
阴囊肿胀及阴囊血肿[例(%)]      
  24 h 13(20.31) 5(7.81) 0.042
  7 d 8(12.50) 2(3.12) 0.048
  30 d 0 0  
住院时间(d, ±s) 7.78±2.60 6.11±1.87 <0.001
服务质量量表评分(分, ±s) 18.14±2.45 21.47±2.12 <0.001
[1]
Ruhl CE, Everhart JE. Risk factors for inguinal hernia among adults in the US population[J]. Am J Epidemiol, 2007, 165(10): 1154-1161.
[2]
Huerta S, Timmerman C, Argo M, et al. Open, laparoscopic, and robotic inguinal hernia repair: outcomes and predictors of complications[J]. J Surg Res, 2019, 241(1): 119-127.
[3]
Perez AJ, Strassle PD, Sadava EE, et al. Nationwide analysis of inpatient laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2020, 30(3): 292-298.
[4]
Group HS, Ramshorst GV. International guidelines for groin hernia management[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(1): 1-165.
[5]
Takata H, Matsutani T, Hagiwara N, et al. Assessment of the incidence of chronic pain and discomfort after primary inguinal hernia repair[J]. J Surg Res, 2016, 206(2): 391-397.
[6]
Piazzese E, Galipò S, Mazzeo GI. Proposal of ecographic classification for seroma after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair[J]. J Ultrasound, 2015, 18(4): 349.
[7]
Abuosi AA, Atinga RA. Service quality in healthcare institutions: establishing the gaps for policy action[J]. Int J Health Care Qual Assur, 2013, 26(5): 481-492.
[8]
刘曙光，刘燕军. 腹腔镜下与开放式无张力疝修补术手术相关指标及并发症比较[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(4): 409-412.
[9]
唐健雄. 重视腹壁疝术后并发症预防及处理[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2020, 40(7): 758-760.
[10]
Andresen K, Burcharth J, Fonnes S, et al. Chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair with the ONSTEP versus the Lichtenstein technique, results of a double-blinded multicenter randomized clinical trial[J]. Langenbecks Arch Surg, 2017, 402(2): 213-218.
[11]
Fränneby U, Sandblom G, Nordin P, et al. Risk factors for long-term pain after hernia surgery[J]. Ann Surg, 2006, 244(2): 212-219.
[12]
Engelen M, Dilen K, Baten E. Laparoscopic treated neuralgia after inguinal hernia repair: case report and literature review[J]. Acta Chir Belg, 2017, 117(5): 283-289.
[13]
黄秀菊，卢榜裕，黄俊, 等. 免除沙袋压迫对腔镜下完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术后的效果观察[J]. 微创医学, 2017, 12(2): 283-284.
[14]
梁榕钰，王振宜，崔灿, 等. 中药热罨包的临床应用进展[J]. 中医外治杂志, 2017, 26(3): 44-46.
[1] 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.
[2] 杜晓辉, 崔建新. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术淋巴结清扫范围与策略[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 5-8.
[3] 周岩冰, 刘晓东. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术消化道吻合重建方式的选择[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 9-13.
[4] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[5] 王春荣, 陈姜, 喻晨. 循Glisson蒂鞘外解剖、Laennec膜入路腹腔镜解剖性左半肝切除术临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 37-40.
[6] 李建美, 邓静娟, 杨倩. 两种术式联合治疗肝癌合并肝硬化门静脉高压的安全性及随访评价[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 41-44.
[7] 李晓玉, 江庆, 汤海琴, 罗静枝. 围手术期综合管理对胆总管结石并急性胆管炎患者ERCP +LC术后心肌损伤的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 57-60.
[8] 甄子铂, 刘金虎. 基于列线图模型探究静脉全身麻醉腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术后肠道功能紊乱的影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 61-65.
[9] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[10] 杨体飞, 杨传虎, 陆振如. 改良无充气经腋窝入路全腔镜下甲状腺手术对喉返神经功能的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 74-77.
[11] 李凯, 陈淋, 向涵, 苏怀东, 张伟. 一种U型记忆合金线在经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 15-15.
[12] 易明超, 汪鑫, 向涵, 苏怀东, 张伟. 一种T型记忆金属线在经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 599-599.
[13] 马涛, 叶春伟, 刘滔, 彭文希, 李志鹏. 腹腔镜与开放性离断式肾盂成形术治疗小儿肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 605-610.
[14] 曹智, 朱希望, 王尉, 张辉, 杨成林, 张小明. 经皮肾镜碎石取石术中不同肾盂内压力与围术期并发症相关性研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 616-620.
[15] 刘成, 赖聪, 黄健, 王建辰, 罗茜芸, 许可慰. EDGE SP1000单孔手术机器人辅助腹腔镜下猪输尿管部分切除联合端端吻合术的可行性研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 642-646.
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