腹股沟区分层解剖在阑尾切除术手术入路中的美容意义  

Laminated Incision in Inguinal Region for Aesthetic Considerable for Appendectomy

作　　者：李建一[1] 张扬[1] 张文海[1] 贾实[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国医科大学附属盛京医院第七普通外科.沈阳110004

出　　处：《中国实用乡村医生杂志》2013年第4期35-38,共4页Chinese Practical Journal of Rural Doctor

摘　　要：目的探讨腹股沟区分层切口入路的阑尾切除术的可行性，与麦氏切口阑尾切除术的优劣进行比较。方法286例根据本人的意愿分成两组，InguinalCutout（IC）组进行腹股沟分层切口入路的阑尾切除术；Mc．BurneyCutout（MC）组进行麦氏切口入路的阑尾切除术。分别比较两组患者的手术操作时间、术后排气时间、切口愈合情况和切口疼痛情况。结果两组患者在手术操作时间和切口愈合情况方面，差异无统计学意义。IC组的术后排气时间早于MC组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。IC组患者术后切口疼痛轻于MC组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论与麦氏切口入路相比，腹股沟区分层入路的阑尾切除术具有至少同等的治疗效果，但美容的效果明显，可操作性强，易于被患者接受，适合在没有腹腔镜设备的广大基层医院推广。Objective To study the feasibility of the new approach of appendectomy considered for aesthetic and to compare with the traditional appendectomy. Methods 286 patients were randomly divided into two groups： patients in IC group underwent inguinal incision; patients in MC group underwent Mc-Burney incision. We assessed the time of appendectomy, evacuated time after appendectomy, incision healing, and incision pain. Results There was no difference about time of appendectomy and incision healing between IC and MC group： The evacuated time after operation in IC group was shorter than that in MC group, the difference was significant （P〈0.05）. The incision pain in IC group was lighter than that in MC group, the difference was significant （P〈0.05）. Conclusion The new approach of appendectomy was feasible and could achieve equal therapeutic efficacy comparing with traditionary appendectomy, moreover, it was more cosmetic than traditional operation, and would be popularized in the hospitals which had no laparoscope.

关 键 词：阑尾切除术 腹股沟区 分层切口 

分 类 号：R65[医药卫生—外科学]