PPH单、双荷包缝合法治疗重度痔的临床对比研究  

Comparison on Therapeutic Efficacies of Two Surgical Procedures： PPH plus Single Purse-string Suture and PPH plus Double Purse-string Suture in the Treatment of Severe Hemorrhoids

作　　者：贾莉[1] 王建平[1] 

机构地区：[1]成都大学附属医院肛肠科,四川成都610081

出　　处：《中国肛肠病杂志》2010年第12期24-26,共3页Chinese Journal of Coloproctology

摘　　要：为比较PPH单、双荷包缝合法治疗重度痔的临床疗效，将80例重度痔患者随机分为治疗组和对照组，治疗组采用PPH双荷包缝合法治疗，对照组采用PPH单荷包缝合法治疗．对比分析两组患者的疗效。结果显示，治疗组在切除黏膜环的宽度及均匀程度、控制吻合口的位置、术后痔核同缩率方面优于对照组；对照组在术中出血、手术时间方面优于治疗组；两组术后出血、疼痛、排尿障碍、肛门坠胀等并发症发生情况及治愈率方面差异无统计学意义。结果表明，PPH双荷包缝合法治疗重度痔在切除黏膜环的宽度及均匀程度、控制吻合口的位置、痔核回缩率等方面具有单荷包不可比拟的优点，而且双荷包可操作性强，因此，在严格控制适应症的情况下，应用PPH双荷包缝合法治疗重度痔效果更佳。The objective of the study was to compare the therapeutic efficacies of two surgical procedures. PPH plus single purse-string suture （PPH plus SPSS） and PPH plus double purse-string suture（PPH plus DPSS） in the treatment of severe hemorrhoids（SH）. Eighty patients with SH were randomized into two groups,patients in the study group underwent PPH plus DPSS,while patients in the control group underwent PPH plus SPSS. The therapeutic efficacies of the two groups were compared each other. As results, PPH plus DPSS was superior in the aspects of proper resection of mucosa ring,location control of anastomotic stoma and postoperative hemorrhoid retraction,while the PPH plus SPSS was superior in the aspects of intraoperative blood and operative time; and there was no statistical difference in the aspects of postoperative bleeding,pain,urinary dysfunction and the tenesmus sensation of anus between the two groups. It is concluded that PPH plus DPSS is better and simpler in manipulation,and can ensure a better therpeutic efficacy so long as the indication is strictly controlled.

关 键 词：痔 吻合器痔上黏膜环切术 单荷包缝合法 双荷包缝合法 

分 类 号：R699.8[医药卫生—泌尿科学]