高频电刀在混合痔外剥内扎术中临床应用  

Application of the high frequency electrotome on the treatment of Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy

作　　者：赵亮[1] 王永鹏[2] 殷志韬[1] 

机构地区：[1]沈阳市肛肠医院肛门病科,辽宁沈阳110054 [2]辽宁省肿瘤医院大肠外科,辽宁沈阳110042

出　　处：《临床军医杂志》2016年第2期176-178,共3页Clinical Journal of Medical Officers

摘　　要：目的探讨应用高频电刀在混合痔外剥内扎术中不同使用方式的临床疗效。方法对100例混合痔Ⅲ期和Ⅳ期患者随机分为观察组及对照组,每组各50例。观察组应用弯剪刀切除外痔辅以高频电刀电凝止血,对照组全程应用高频电刀行外剥内扎术。采用视觉模拟疼痛(VAS)评分法,观察术后两组患者切口疼痛差异。术后随访120 d,观察切口瘢痕色泽、血管分布、厚度、柔软度,并予以量化评分。结果术后第1、3天:两组疼痛评分均无差异(P>0.05);术后第7、10天,观察组疼痛评分均低于对照组(P<0.05)。术后120 d,两组患者切口瘢痕评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论在进行混合痔外剥内扎手术时,弯剪刀切除外痔辅以高频电刀止血,能减轻患者术后疼痛,降低切口瘢痕化。Objective To compare scar formation and pain intensity in incisions of mixed hemorrhoid made using a cold steel scalpel with the hemostasis of high frequency electrotome or the high frequency electrotome. Methods Totally 100 Subjects were enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into observation group（50 cases） and control group（50 cases） based on different treatment methods. In the observation group,the patients＇ hemorrhoid was made with a cold steel scalpel,while the high frequency electrotome were used in the control group. Differences between two method incisions were evaluated by assessment of pain intensity by patients themselves and assessment of scar formation by observers at 120 days postsurgery. Results Observers rated incision vascularization,pigmentation,thickness,and relief. The mean observer score of incisions made with the high frequency electrotome was（10. 33 ± 1. 05）,while that of incisions made with the cold steel scalpel was（9. 45 ± 1. 048）,P〈 0. 05. Pain intensity between two method incisions is rated by patients themselves according to VAS. The incisions made with the high frequency electrotome are of greater pain which lasts longer time（ P〈 0. 05）. Conclusion Results showed different wound pain / scar formation in skin incisions made with the high frequency electrotome compared with incisions made with a cold steel scalpel.

关 键 词：混合痔 外剥内扎术 高频电刀 

分 类 号：R657.1[医药卫生—外科学]