腹股沟马鞍疝无张力疝修补手术方式的选择  

The Choice of Tension-Free Hernioplasty in the Treatment of Inguinal Saddle Hernia

作　　者：龚艳萍[1] 雷文章[2] 

机构地区：[1]四川大学华西医院外科,四川成都610041 [2]四川大学华西医院西南地区疝中心,四川成都610041

出　　处：《华西医学》2009年第7期1658-1660,共3页West China Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的:探讨腹股沟马鞍疝无张力疝修补手术方式的选择。方法:回顾性调查206例腹股沟马鞍疝患者,其中行巴德网塞充填式修补术57例,普里灵疝装置腹膜前间隙修补术149例,观察两种修补方式的手术时间、手术方式及要点、术后并发症、恢复情况、平均住院日及复发率。结果:两种方式修补的患者围手术期均无死亡。手术时间、恢复情况、术后平均住院天数和并发症两种方式差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。患者术后平均随访分别为(2.3±0.5)和(2.2±0.7)年,随访时间无统计学差异(P>0.05)。普里灵疝装置修补组的费用较巴德网塞组低。57例巴德网塞修补术后有2例复发,149例普里灵疝装置腹膜前间隙修补术后无复发。结论:腹膜前间隙无张力疝修补术是腹股沟马鞍疝的首选手术方式。Objective：To summarize the choice of tension--free hernioplasty in the treatment of inguinal saddle hernia. Methods： A retrospective analysis was made in 206 patients with inguinal saddle hernia, Bard mesh perfix plug was used for 57 patients, the other 149 patients were treated by Prolene Hernia System（PHS）. we compared the operative time, the main points of operation, postoperative complications, postoperative recovery, hospital stay and recurrence rate between two groups. Results： No case was died during the hospital stay. The operative time, recovery time, average hospital stay, postoperative complications in Bard mesh perfix plug group were no difference compared with that in Prolene Hernia System group（P〉0.05）. The average follow--up time was （2.2±0.5）and （2.2±0.7）years respectively, with no difference（P〉0.05）. Prolene Hernia System group costed less than mesh prefix plug group. Two cases had recurrence in Bard mesh perfix plug group, none in Prolene Hernia System. Conclusion： Preperitoneal space hernioplasty is the first choice of tension-free hernioplasty in the treatment of inguinal saddle hernia.

关 键 词：腹股沟马鞍疝 无张力疝修补术 腹膜前间隙修补 普里灵疝装置 巴德网塞 

分 类 号：R656.2[医药卫生—外科学]