PPH联合外痔剥切术和传统分段外剥内扎术治疗重度环状混合痔的效果对比

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (17)
Related Citation (4)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (38 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the effect of procedure for prolapse and haemorrhoids(PPH)combined with external hemorrhoids cutting-stripping surgery and traditional Milligan-Morgan surgery in the treatment of circumferential mixed hemorrhoids.Methods A total of 62 patients with circumferential mixed hemorrhoids who were treated in our hospital from April 2014 to April 2016 were enrolled in and divided into observation group and control group according to different treatment methods,with 31 patients in each group.Patients in the observation group were treated with PPH combined with external hemorrhoids cutting-stripping surgery,while patients in the control group were treated with traditional Milligan-Morgan surgery.The clinical pathophysiological parameters,effect and postoperative complication rate of two groups were compared.Results Operation time,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative pain time;using times of postoperative 36 h anesthesia drug and hospital stay time in the observation group was significantly less than that in the control group(P＜0.01).VAS score of after surgery in both groups was significantly lower than that on the day before(P＜0.01)and VAS score of in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group at simultaneous stage(P＜0.01).Total effective rate of the observation group was 93.5%,which was significantly higher than 71.0%of the control group;while postoperative complication rate of the observation group was 12.9%,which was significantly lower than 38.7%of the control group(P＜0.05).Conclusion PPH combined with external hemorrhoids cutting-stripping surgery has the advantages of less trauma,sooner reconery,less pain and postoperative complication compared with Milligan-Morgan surgery in the treatment of circumferential mixed hemorrhoids.

Key words： PPH External hemorrhoids cutting-stripping surgery Milligan-Morgan surgery Circumferential mixed hemorrhoids

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	HUANG Guo-feng
	QIU Guang-ming
	ZHOU Ming-zhu

Cite this article:

HUANG Guo-feng,QIU Guang-ming,ZHOU Ming-zhu. Effect comparison of PPH combined with external hemorrhoids cuttingstripping surgery and traditional Milligan-Morgan surgery in the treatment of circumferential mixed hemorrhoids[J]. 中国当代医药, 2017, 24(3): 54-57.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2017/V24/I3/54

[1]	费保刚，常永春.PPH联合外痔切剥术治疗老年重度环状混合痔的疗效分析[J].中国实用医刊，2015，42（4）：66-67.
[2]	黄俊明，李铮宇，邝永龙，等.PPH与Milligan-Morgan术式治疗环状混合痔的临床效果观察[J].现代生物医学进展，2012，12（12）：2349-2351.
[3]	艾时刚.PPH联合外剥内扎术及皮桥整形术治疗环状混合痔疗效分析[J].当代医学，2016，22（27）：43-44.
[4]	叶明.PPH联合改良外剥内扎术治疗环状痔的临床疗效观察[J].贵阳中医学院学报，2014，36（2）：75-77.
[5]	中华医学会外科学分会结直肠肛门外科学组，中华中医药学会肛肠专业委员会，中国中西医结合学会大肠肛门病专业委员会.痔临床诊治指南[J].中华胃肠外科杂志，2006，9（5）：461-463.
[6]	吕晨，邹建玲，沈淑华，等.视觉模拟量表和语言评价量表用于术后疼痛评估的比较[J].全科医学临床与教育，2004，4（2）：215-219.
[7]	马陈建，孟镔，陈兵，等.PPH治疗复杂性内痔和环状痔临床疗效观察[J].局解手术学杂志，2014，23（5）：531-534.
[8]	李东冰.外科技术发展对痔诊断、治疗的影响[J].中国临床医生，2014，42（5）：1-4.
[9]	刘扬，刘青，杨润清，等.PPH联合外剥内扎术及皮桥整形术治疗重度环状混合痔的临床疗效观察[J].中国普通外科杂志，2015，24（2）：297.
[10]	杨建华，王晓鹏，金淳民.PPH联合皮瓣弧形切除缝合术治疗重度环状混合痔疗效观察[J].结直肠肛门外科，2014，20（1）：13-15.
[11]	田志勇，毕旭平.单纯PPH与PPH联合外痔切剥术治疗混合痔的临床疗效比较[J].中国现代普通外科进展，2016，19（8）：651-653.
[12]	邓明，袁海涛.吻合器痔上黏膜环形切除术与外剥内扎手术治疗环状混合痔的效果及安全性差异[J].安徽医药，2016，20（1）：150-151.
[13]	李安云，苏芹芹，王洪波，等.外剥内扎加肛垫悬吊固定术与PPH术治疗重度痔远期疗效比较[J].中国现代普通外科进展，2014，17（8）：648-649.
[14]	林中超，彭洪，彭明沙．单双荷包缝合在PPH治疗混合痔合并直肠内脱垂的手术效果对比研究[J].西部医学，2013，25（12）：1859－1861.
[15]	陈喜志，王运红，蓝活.吻合器痔上粘膜环切术与外剥内扎术治疗Ⅲ、Ⅳ度内痔的疗效比较[J].现代医院，2014，14（5）：24-26.
[16]	陆坚，徐照秀，吴帅军，等.分段外剥内扎配合痔上黏膜套扎术治疗环状混合痔疗效观察[J].山东医药，2014，54（16）：81-82.
[17]	杨钦清，董芳，梁顺华，等.吻合器痔上黏膜环切术（PPH）与传统外剥内扎术治疗环状混合痔的疗效比较[J].中国现代医生，2015，53（10）：24-26.