用于开放式无张力疝修补术的三种人工材料对比研究  

A Comparative Study on Three Kinds of Artificial Prosthesis for Open Tension-free Hernioplasty

作　　者：李颖[1] 黄永豪[1] 谢扬[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省潮州市庵埠华侨医院普外科,515638

出　　处：《实用全科医学》2004年第5期435-435,404,共2页Applied Journal Of General Practice

摘　　要：目的　比较平面补片、疝环充填补片、三合一疝装置在开放式无张力疝修补术中的临床效价。方法　将 60例腹股沟疝患者随机分为平面补片组、疝环充填补片组、三合一疝装置组进行前瞻性对比研究。结果　三组在住院天数 ,术后并发症、术后不适感、复发率等方面差异无统计学意义 ;手术时间三合一疝装置组比其它二组为长 (P <0 .0 1 ) ;平面补片组的手术费用则明显较其它组低。结论　利用平面补片进行个体化剪裁、自制网塞、增加腹膜前平片的方法行无张力疝修补术 ,其临床效果与疝环充填补片、三合一疝装置相近 ,但具有材料价格较低、术式简单、手术时间短等优点 ,适合在基层医院开展。Objective To compare the differences in results among Prolene Mesh, Perfix plug and Prolene Hernia System in open tension-free hernioplasty. Methods A prospective comparative study was carried out. Sixty patients with inguinal hernia were divided into three groups: Prolene Mesh group, Perfix plug group, Prolene Hernia System group. Results No significant difference was found among the three groups in hospital stay, postoperative complications, postoperative discomfort and recurrence rate. The operation time in Prolene Hernia System was longer than the other two groups. The cost of operation in Prolene Mesh group was obviously the lowest. Conclusions The effect of Prolene Mesh was similar as Perfix plug and Prolene Hernia System. The advantages are lower cost, simple and shorter operation time, so it's suitable for the local hospitals.

关 键 词：开放式无张力疝修补术 人工材料 平面补片 疝环充填补片 三合一疝装置 腹股沟疝 

分 类 号：R656.21[医药卫生—外科学]