Effect on anti-reflux effect and quality of life in patients with GERD complicated with hiatus herniausing lansoprazole combined with itopride assisted laparoscopic repair of esophageal hiatus hernia

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.03.015

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the effect on anti-reflux effect and quality of life in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) complicated with hiatal hernia (HH) using lansoprazole combined with itopride assisted laparoscopic repair of esophageal hiatus hernia.

Methods

A total of 120 patients with GERD complicated with HH who underwent laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair in Baogang Hospital were enrolled into the experimental group (n=60 cases) and the control group (n=60 cases) according to the treatment methods adopted after surgery. The experimental group was treated with laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair+lansoprazole combined with itopride, while the control group was treated with laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair+placebo. The mucosal healing rate, anti-reflux effect and quality of life were compared between the two groups.

Results

After treatment, the total healing rate of mucosa in the laparoscopy group (93.33%) was higher than thatin the laparotomy group (78.33%), with significant difference (P<0.05). 6 months after operation, the scores of heartburn, chest pain, belching and reflux in reflux disease questionnaire (RDQ) in the two groups were significantly lower than those before treatment (P<0.05), and the above scores in the observation group were lower than those in control group (P<0.05). The scores of gastrointestinal quality of life index (GLQI) in the two groups increased after operation, and the score of GLQI in the observation group was significantly higher than that in control group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Lansoprazole combined with itopride assisted laparoscopic repair of esophageal hiatal hernia is effective in the treatment of GERD combined with HH. It can effectively reduce reflux and promote gastric mucosal repair, and it is worthy for clinical application.

Key words: Hiatal hernia, Gastroesophageal reflux disease, Laparoscopy, Proton pump inhibitor

Ruijuan Huang, Xiangying Ma, Weidong Du, Jin Zhao. Effect on anti-reflux effect and quality of life in patients with GERD complicated with hiatus herniausing lansoprazole combined with itopride assisted laparoscopic repair of esophageal hiatus hernia[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(03): 272-275.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhshfbwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.03.015

https://zhshfbwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2021/V15/I03/272

Figures/Tables 3

References 20

[1]	马欣，彭丽华，王潇潇, 等. 食管裂孔疝患者高分辨率食管测压的特点[J]. 世界华人消化杂志, 2016, 24(11): 1718-1724.
[2]	丁海涛，韩智君，曹杰, 等. 腹腔镜疝修补术联合Nissen胃底折叠术治疗食管裂孔疝的前瞻性研究[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(2): 113-118.
[3]	王杰，罗浩，王剑, 等. 腹腔镜下Nissen胃底折叠术联合食管裂孔疝修补术的疗效及预后[J]. 中国现代普通外科进展, 2017, 20(1): 58-59, 62.
[4]	姚丹，任泽强，张蓬波, 等. 腹腔镜下Nissen胃底折叠术治疗老年食管裂孔疝效果的临床分析[J]. 中国普外基础与临床杂志, 2016, 23(3): 319-323.
[5]	邓陶然，李维娜，邓豫, 等. 食管裂孔疝的诊治[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2014, 30(19): 3183-3186.
[6]	王文凭，倪彭智，陈龙奇. 食管裂孔疝的腹腔镜治疗[J]. 世界华人消化杂志, 2016, 24(20): 3087-3097.
[7]	顾越雷，李峰，樊强, 等. 胃食管反流病的基础研究进展及临床诊治现状[J]. 中国普外基础与临床杂志, 2016, 23(11): 1413-1417.
[8]	布艾加尔·牙合甫，刘丽，邵丽. 手术护理路径配合模式在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝手术中的应用[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2017, 21(2): 63-65.
[9]	克力木，阿力木江·麦斯依提，张成, 等. 腹腔镜手术治疗胃食管反流病合并食管裂孔疝650例临床分析[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2014, 34(5): 416-418.
[10]	金亮，蔡飞，李琪, 等. 肝血管瘤患者瘤体剥除与介入栓塞术后生存质量对比评价[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2016, 25(1): 103-108.
[11]	史玲玲，马卫平，陈静, 等. 健康信念指导下的护理干预提高胃癌高危人群胃镜依从性的效果研究[J]. 护士进修杂志, 2017, 32(19): 1737-1741.
[12]	周燕，李保良，姚李吉, 等. 乌梅丸改善非糜烂性胃食管反流病主要症状的临床观察[J]. 中药材, 2016, 39(5): 1169-1172.
[13]	柯文杰，王勇，段鑫, 等. 腹腔镜治疗成人食管裂孔疝手术适应证的选择(附20例报告)[J]. 腹部外科, 2017, 30(5): 390-393.
[14]	吴军，洪芳静. 不同剂量兰索拉唑联合伊托必利治疗胃食管反流病合并食管裂孔疝的治疗效果[J]. 国际消化病杂志, 2018, 38(3): 208-212.
[15]	Banihani SA, Khasawneh FH. Effect of lansoprazole on human sperm motility, sperm viability, seminal nitric oxide production, and seminal calcium chelation[J]. Res Pharm Sci, 2018, 13(5): 460-468.
[16]	傅朝春，徐安书，张世博, 等. 腹腔镜下食管裂孔疝修补术的临床疗效分析[J]. 华西医学, 2017, 32(3): 425-427.
[17]	田志强，张重阳. 腹腔镜治疗食管裂孔疝的现状与进展[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 7(6): 499-501.
[18]	Omura N, Yano F, Tsuboi K, et al. Surgical results of laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease with special reference to recurrence[J]. Esophagus, 2018, 15(4): 217-223.
[19]	辛维栋，魏煜程，陈立材. 腹腔镜手术治疗食管裂孔疝28例临床疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2015, 9(5): 384-385.
[20]	丁轶人，江涌，葛玮, 等. 四孔法腹腔镜手术治疗食管裂孔疝的疗效分析[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2015, 20(6): 423-425.

组别	例数	完全愈合	部分愈合	未愈合	总愈合率
对照组	60	32(53.33)	15(25.00)	13(21.67)	47(78.33)
试验组	60	35(58.33)	21(35.00)	4(6.67)	56(93.33)
χ²值					4.594
P值					0.032

组别	例数	完全愈合	部分愈合	未愈合	总愈合率
对照组	60	32(53.33)	15(25.00)	13(21.67)	47(78.33)
试验组	60	35(58.33)	21(35.00)	4(6.67)	56(93.33)
χ²值					4.594
P值					0.032

时间	组别	例数	烧心	胸痛	反酸	反流
术前	试验组	60	5.9±2.1	4.8±2.3	4.7±2.5	5.1±2.1
	对照组	60	5.8±1.9	4.8±2.1	4.6±2.2	5.1±2.3
	t值		0.250	0.000	0.213	0
	P值		0.803	1.000	0.832	1
术后6个月	试验组	60	2.3±0.9*	1.8±0.6*	2.1±0.7*	2.1±0.5*
	对照组	60	1.5±0.6*	1.1±0.5*	1.4±0.6*	1.5±0.6*
	t值		5.309	6.365	5.384	5.356
	P值		<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

时间	组别	例数	烧心	胸痛	反酸	反流
术前	试验组	60	5.9±2.1	4.8±2.3	4.7±2.5	5.1±2.1
	对照组	60	5.8±1.9	4.8±2.1	4.6±2.2	5.1±2.3
	t值		0.250	0.000	0.213	0
	P值		0.803	1.000	0.832	1
术后6个月	试验组	60	2.3±0.9*	1.8±0.6*	2.1±0.7*	2.1±0.5*
	对照组	60	1.5±0.6*	1.1±0.5*	1.4±0.6*	1.5±0.6*
	t值		5.309	6.365	5.384	5.356
	P值		<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001

组别	例数	GLQI
组别	例数	术前	术后6个月
试验组	60	90.1±15.3	115.1±18.6*
对照组	60	91.5±16.3	126.9±15.3*
t值		0.439	3.482
P值		0.661	0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export