基层医院痔疮患者应用PPH技术的安全性探讨  

作　　者：刘新华 吴红珍 吴志敏 周军 孔红兵 

机构地区：[1]湖北省黄石市黄石港社区卫生服务中心,湖北435002

出　　处：《当代医学》2014年第23期21-22,共2页Contemporary Medicine

摘　　要：目的：通过对比探讨基层医院痔疮患者应用PPH技术的安全性。方法选取湖北省黄石市黄石港社区卫生服务中心2008年1月～2012年12月收治的110例痔疮患者，随机均分为观察组（A组）与对照组（B组），观察组采用PPH术加外痔痔核切除术，对照组采用传统开放式手术。对2组患者的手术持续时间和术后恢复时间进行记录和对比，同时比较2组患者术后并发症的发生情况，包括肛门失禁、肛门狭窄、出血、感染、尿潴留等等。结果经过治疗，观察组（A组）手术平均时间为（21.3±5.7）min，对照组（B组）手术平均时间为（44.3±7.2）min，2组在手术平均时间上差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）；在住院时间上，观察组（A组）平均（3.5±1.5）d，对照组（B组）（9.5±4.0）d，2组差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,并发症情况上，观察组（A组）在肛门狭窄、出血、感染、尿潴留方面显著强于对照组（B组）（P〈0.05）。结论基层医院PPH技术的安全性是优于传统开放式手术的，但仍存在一定问题有待进一步改进。Objective By contrast, explore the primary hospital patients with hemorrhoids application the PPH technology security. Methods To select 110 cases in the hospital were treated from January 2008 to December 2012 hemorrhoids patients, randomly distributed equally to the observation group and the control group, the observation group PPH surgery plus external hemorrhoids hemorrhoids resection, the control group using traditional open surgery. Records and compared the two groups of patients with duration of surgery and postoperative recovery time, while the occurrence of postoperative complications, including incontinence, anal stenosis, bleeding, infection, urinary retention. Results After treatment, mean operation time of the observation group （21.3±5.7） min, mean operation time of the control group （44.3±7.2） min, with a statistically signiifcant difference （P〈0.05） in the two groups in the mean operation time;Hospital stayon average observation group （3.5±1.5） d, the control group （9.5±4.0） d, two groups were statistically signiifcant differences （P〈0.05）, complications the observation group anal stricture, bleeding, infection, urine retention is clearly stronger than the control group （P〈0.05）. Conclusion The primary hospital PPH technology security is better than the traditional open surgery, but there are still some issues to be further improved.

关 键 词：痔疮 治疗 PPH 安全性 

分 类 号：R657.18[医药卫生—外科学]