经腹腹膜前疝修补术与UHS疝修补术的临床对比研究  

Clinical comparative analysis of TAPP versus UHS hernia repair

作　　者：康德新[1] 于洪亮[1] 栾文勃[2] 魏斌[1] 马宁[1] 

机构地区：[1]大庆油田总医院普外科,黑龙江省163001 [2]大庆市第四医院放射科,黑龙江省163001

出　　处：《中华疝和腹壁外科杂志（电子版）》2016年第2期120-122,共3页Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition)

摘　　要：目的分析经腹腹膜前疝修补术（TAPP）与超普疝装置（UHS）疝修补术的临床疗效,为合理选择术式提供参考。方法回顾性分析2014年1-12月,大庆油田总医院收治的287例成人腹股沟疝患者,将其分为二组,分别为采用腹腔镜下TAPP与UHS疝修补术治疗组。结果 TAPP组平均住院时间（2.1±0.8）d,平均离床活动时间（6.0±2.0）d,与UHS组平均住院时间（4.8±1.5）d、平均离床活动时间（15.0±8.0）d两方面对比,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;TAPP组13例（7.2%）发生并发症,UHS组9例（8.4%）发生,二组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;二组均无复发患者;二组在手术时间和住院费用比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论治疗成人腹股沟疝疾病时,TAPP与UHS疝修补术均有良好的效果,但腹腔镜手术给患者带来的痛苦相对较小,离床活动时间早,住院时间短,建议优先采用。Objective To compare the clinical efficiency of laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal herniorrhaphy（ TAPP） and UHS hernia repair,so as to provide reference for choosing ideal operation methods. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 287 adult patients with inguinal hernia who were admitted to Daqing Oilfield general hospital between January 2014 and December2014. They were divided into two groups according different treatment： TAPP repair and UHS repair.Results The hospitalization time and first- off- bed time in the TAPP group were significantly shorter than those in the UHS group（ P〈0. 05）. Postoperative complications in TAPP group and UHS group,were13 cases（ 7. 2%） and 9 cases（ 8. 4%）,respectively. There was no significant difference between TAPP and UHS when considering operating time,complications,hospitalization cost and recurrent rates（ P〉0. 05）. Conclusion TAPP and UHS hernia repair are both safe and effective techniques for adult inguinal hernia patients. TAPP is superior to UHS technique in improving postoperative pain, shortening hospitalization and first- off- bed time.

关 键 词：疝 腹股沟 腹腔镜 疝修补术 

分 类 号：R656.21[医药卫生—外科学]