腹腔镜与传统疝无张力修补术的临床效果比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (519 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To investigate the clinical effect of laparoscopic and traditional hernia tension-free repair.Methods From January 2015 to December 2016,64 patients with inguinal hernia treated in our hospital were selected as subjects,and they were randomly divided into two groups by the computer method,each group with 32 cases.The control group was used traditional hernia tension-free repair and the observation group was used laparoscopic inguinal hernia tension-free repair.Perioperative index,incidence rate of complications and wound healing of two groups were compared.Results The time of operation,postoperative pain and hospital stay in observation group were (16.58±5.76)min,(4.23±2.05)d and (2.88±1.26)d respectively,they were shorter than the control group (30.85±9.37)min,(7.54±2.12)d, (5.69±1.43)d,the differences were statistical significance (P<0.05).The intraoperative blood loss in the observation group was (3.47±0.52)ml it was less than the control group [(7.13±0.55)ml],and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).The incidence of complications was lower in the observation group (9.52%) than that in the control group (28.57%),and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).Incidence rate of complications was 9.52%,lower than that in the control group (28.57%)(P<0.05).The wound healing in the observation group was better than the control group,and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).Conclusion The effect of aparoscopic inguinal hernia tension-free repair in treating inguinal hernia patients is better than traditional hernia tension-free repair,and it is suitable for clinical application.

Key words： Traditional hernia tension-free repair Aparoscopic inguinal hernia tension-free repair Clinical effect

Received: 17 June 2017

PACS:

R656.21

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LIN Jun-shuang

Cite this article:

LIN Jun-shuang. Clinical effect comparison of laparoscopic and traditional hernia tension-free repair[J]. 中国当代医药, 2017, 24(25): 23-25.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2017/V24/I25/23

[18]	陈志国,王贤书,杨志国,等.不同术式经胸治疗小儿混合型食管裂孔疝疗效比较[J].疑难病杂志,2016,15（10）：1024-1027.
[1]	李鸷.腹腔镜与传统疝无张力修补术临床疗效比较[J].吉林医学,2016,37（3）：678-679.
[2]	付月云,王红旭.完全腹膜外腹腔镜下疝修补术与无张力疝修补术疗效比较[J].中国现代医药杂志,2015,17（5）：53-55.
[3]	庞军.腹腔镜疝修补术与开放式无张力疝修补术的临床应用[J].中国药物与临床,2014,14（3）：396-397.
[4]	冯春武.腹腔镜下与开放式无张力疝修补术治疗成人脐疝的对照研究[J].中国临床研究,2014,27（11）：1366-1368.
[5]	D′Netto TJ,Falk GL.A Technique for the Laparoscopic Repair of Paraoesophageal Hernia Without Mesh[J].J Gastrointest Surg,2014,18（4）：851-857.
[6]	杨华,王俊伟.腹腔镜和开放式无张力疝修补术对患者术后早期疼痛的影响[J].中国普外基础与临床杂志,2016, 23（11）：1384-1388.
[7]	焦健.成人腹腔镜疝修补术与无张力疝修补术的临床对照研究[J].临床医学研究与实践,2016,1（23）：88-89.
[8]	张程光,祖艳梅,滕廷鹏.腹腔镜疝修补术与充填式无张力疝修补术治疗成人腹股沟疝的临床比较[J].甘肃医药,2016,35（2）：110-111.
[9]	江雪峰.腹腔镜疝修补术与开放式无张力疝修补术治疗成人腹股沟疝的临床比较[J].吉林医学,2014,35（23）：5185.
[10]	张朋,牛兆健.探讨腹腔镜疝修补术与开放式无张力疝修补术治疗成人腹股沟疝的临床疗效[J].吉林医学,2014,35（19）：4203-4204.
[11]	万新时.腹腔镜疝修补术与开放式无张力疝修补术治疗成人腹股沟疝的临床效果比较[J].吉林医学,2015,36（16）：3557-3558.
[12]	佟雪,温玉新.腹股沟疝修补术不同解剖入路疗效的Meta分析[J].中国当代医药,2015,22（9）：13-17.
[13]	荆波.经腹腔镜全腹膜外无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的效果观察[J].当代医学,2015,21（21）：27-28.
[14]	李勇男,吴硕东,于晓鹏.单孔与多孔腹腔镜无张力修补术治疗腹股沟疝的对比研究[J].中国现代普通外科进展,2015,18（2）：147-150.
[15]	陶红光,宗华.腹腔镜疝修补术与开放式无张力疝修补术治疗成人腹股沟疝的疗效观察[J].中国当代医药,2016, 23（25）：22-24.
[16]	陈春山.疝环充填式无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝临床疗效及安全性研究[J].中国医药科学,2015,5（21）：215-217.
[17]	孙广文,肖春林.腹腔镜与开放式无张力疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟斜疝的疗效对比[J].中国伤残医学,2015,23（23）：74-76.
[19]	黄卫.糖尿病患者腹股沟疝无张力修补术围手术期抗生素的临床应用[J].西部医学,2015,27（2）：260-261.
[20]	王福荣,李医明.腹腔镜与无张力疝修补术治疗成人腹股沟疝效果对比观察[J].人民军医,2015,58（8）：883-885.
[21]	周克兵.平片无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的临床效果和安全性分析[J].中国当代医药,2015,22（3）：48-49.