Hem-o-lok与阑尾缝扎荷包缝合结扎在经腹腔镜阑尾切除阑尾残端处理中的应用效果比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (20)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (40 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the clinical effects of Hem-o-lok ligature clamp clamping and appendix stump suture and purse embedding in appendix stump by laparoscopic appendectomy.Methods A total of 100 cases of appendicitis patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2018 were selected as the research objects.Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups by random number table method,50 cases in each group.The appendix stump was clamped with Hem-o-lok ligature clamp was used in laparoscopic appendectomy for patients in the clamping group,and Hem-o-lok ligation clip was used in patients in the purse suture group for clamping appendectomy the appendix stump was sutured,purse was sutured and embedded was used in laparoscopic appendectomy for patients in the purse suture group.The operation condition,postoperative pain score,postoperative complications,postoperative recovery,and immune function index were compared between the two groups.Results In terms of the surgery,the surgery time in the purse suture group was longer than that in the clamping group,the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the amount of intraoperative blood loss between the two groups(P＞0.05).In terms of postoperative pain scores,there were no statistically significant differences in pain scores between the two groups at 8,12,24,and 48 h after surgery (P＞0.05).In terms of postoperative complications,the total incidence of postoperative complications of purse suture group was 4.00%,and the to-tal incidence of postoperative complications in the clamping group was 18.00%.The total incidence of postoperative complications of postoperative complications in the purse suture group was lower than that in the clamping group,the difference was statistically significant(P＜0.05).In terms of postoperative recovery,the anal exhaust recovery time and length of hospital stay in the purse suture group were both shorter than those in the clamping group,the differences were statistically significant(P＜0.05).In terms of immune function indexes,the CD3+,CD4/CD8 of the two groups after surgery were lower than those before surgery,the differences were statistically significant(P＜0.05),and the CD3+,CD4/CD8 in the purse suture group were higher than that in the clamping group,the differences were statistically significant(P＜0.05).Conclusion In laparoscopic appendectomy,Hem-o-lok ligature clamping and purse suture embedding can effectively treat the appendix stump,which has their own advantages.The surgery time of the Hem-o-lok ligature clamping is relatively short and easy to operate.The postoperative complications of purse suture embedding are less,and the postoperative recovery is faster.Clinically,the corresponding appendix stump treatment method can be reasonably selected according to the specific needs of the patient.

Key words： Appendicitis Laparoscopic appendectomy Appendix stump Hem-o-lok Purse suture embedding

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LIANG Yong-sheng
	GUAN Jian-xin
	CHEN Zhen-huan

Cite this article:

LIANG Yong-sheng,GUAN Jian-xin,CHEN Zhen-huan. Comparison of the application effects of Hem-o-lok and appendix transfixion and purse suture ligation in the treatment of appendix stump by laparoscopic appendectomy[J]. 中国当代医药, 2019, 26(2): 17-20.

URL:

http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/ OR http://dangdaiyiyao.com/EN/Y2019/V26/I2/17

[1]	牛旭.腹腔镜阑尾切除术三种阑尾残端处理方式的比较[J].河北医学，2016，22（12）：2043-2045.
[2]	蒋佳凯，张盛.腹腔镜阑尾切除术阑尾残端不同处理方法效果比较[J].浙江临床医学，2017，19（10）：1864-1865.
[3]	Xue CR，Lin BQ，Huang ZY，et al.Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis：an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J].Surg Today，2015，45（9）：1179-1186.
[4]	Xiao Y，Shi G，Zhang J，et al.Surgical site infection after laparoscopic and open appendectomy：a multicenter large consecutive cohort study[J].Surg Endosc，2015，29（6）：1384-1393.
[5]	林琳，徐飞鹏，黄哲，等.腹腔镜阑尾切除术阑尾残端处理的方式比较[J].中国医学创新，2015，12（10）：53-55.
[6]	张朋飞，陈霞，王振波，等.腹腔镜下阑尾残端的处理体会[J].腹腔镜外科杂志，2017，22（2）：137-139.
[7]	龚建云，汪江，郑云彭，等.改良荷包缝合法在腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的应用[J].中国微创外科杂志，2017，17（5）：455-457.
[9]	张冬辉，庄哲宏，张剑宝，等.腹腔镜阑尾切除术中倒“8”字阑尾残端包埋法与荷包包埋法的随机对照研究[J].中国医学创新，2017，14（4）：1-4.
[10]	尤小兰，王元杰，连彦军，等.腹腔镜下阑尾残端荷包缝合与单纯结扎的临床疗效评价[J].中华胃肠外科杂志，2015，18（12）：1272-1273.
[11]	张永康，王玉珍，杜明国，等.腹腔镜阑尾切除术阑尾残端荷包缝合包埋与Hem-o-lok的比较[J].中国微创外科杂志，2014，14（6）：512-515.
[8]	Zhao LL，Liao ZQ，Feng SG，et al.Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendicectomy in children：a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Pediatr Surg Int，2015，31（4）：347-353.
[12]	高文波.腹腔镜与开腹阑尾切除术治疗穿孔性阑尾炎效果对比分析[J].中国民康医学，2013，25（8）：32-33.
[13]	张利军，宋娇娇，王旺河，等.自固定倒刺可吸收缝合线荷包缝合在腹腔镜阑尾切除术残端包埋中的应用体会[J].中国现代医生，2016，54（5）：38-40.
[14]	苏拓，李若凡，高旭，等.缝扎阑尾根部并荷包包埋阑尾残端在腹腔镜阑尾切除术的应用[J].中国临床保健杂志，2014，17（6）：645-646.
[15]	姜笑明，陈润浩，黄文海，等.腹腔镜阑尾切除术两种阑尾残端处理方法的前瞻性对比研究[J].中国全科医学，2018，21（6）：712-714.
[16]	钟玉兵，周苏君，张国强，等.Hem-o-lok结扎锁在腹腔镜阑尾切除术残端处理的应用[J].江苏医药，2013，39（22）：2754-2755.
[17]	吴新权，安勇，蔡辉华，等.荷包缝合包埋阑尾残端在腹腔镜阑尾切除术的应用[J].江苏医药，2018，44（1）：114-115.
[18]	文飞.阑尾残端荷包包埋腹腔镜阑尾切除术与开腹阑尾切除术对比研究[J].吉林医学，2017，38（10）：1818-1821.
[19]	杨晓军，司若湟，屈坤鹏，等.腹腔镜阑尾切除术阑尾残端两种处理方法的对比研究[J].腹腔镜外科杂志，2014，1（8）：610-612.
[20]	蒋安科，周庆，李强，等.腹腔镜阑尾切除术与开腹阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的疗效比较[J].现代生物医学进展，2015，15（24）：4710-4712.