腹股沟疝腹膜前修补与网塞修补术式的对比研究  

Comparative study on the operative methods of inguinal hernia preperitoneal hernia repair and mesh plug hernia repair

作　　者：任正华 于海洋[1] 石庆龙[1] 王红禄[1] 曹双军[1] 任继宗 Ren Zhenghua;Yu Haiyang;Shi Qinglong;Wang Honglu;Cao Shuangjun;Ren Xuzong(Department of General Surgery, Liangxiang Hospital, Fangshan District, Beijing 102401, China)

机构地区：[1]北京市房山区良乡医院普外科

出　　处：《中华疝和腹壁外科杂志（电子版）》2019年第4期339-341,共3页Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition)

摘　　要：目的探讨腹股沟疝腹膜前修补与网塞修补术式的对比研究。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2018年1月,北京市房山区良乡医院接受开放腹股沟疝无张力修补术1 237例患者的临床资料,根据术式不同分为网塞组(703例)和腹膜前组(534例),分析比较2组患者术后感染、复发、慢性疼痛、异物感等不良事件的发生情况。结果术后随访12~24个月,腹膜前修补在复发率、补片感染、术后慢性疼痛方面均优于网塞组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论腹膜前间隙腹股沟疝无张力修补术安全、有效、可行性强,术后并发症发生率低。Objective To investigate the comparative study on the operative methods of inguinal hernia preperitoneal hernia repair and mesh plug hernia repair. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 1 237 patients with inguinal hernia who underwent open tension-free hernia repair from January 2010 to January 2018 in Liangxiang hospital, Fangshan district, Beijing. They were divided into two groups of Plug and Pre-peritoneal according to operation method. The infection, recurrence, chronic pain, foreign body sensation were compared. Results 1 237 cases were enrolled and followed up for 12 to 24 months. There are no significant difference between two groups in recurrence rate, mesh infection, chronic pain. Pre-peritoneal group was better than plug group in terms of recurrence rate, mesh infection and postoperative chronic pain, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). Conclusion pre-peritoneal hernia repair is safe and effective with a lower complication rates.

关 键 词：疝 腹股沟 疝修补术 腹膜前 网塞 

分 类 号：R656.21[医药卫生—外科学]