商环包皮环切术和传统包皮环切术的疗效和手术并发症
| 作者: |
1曾锋,
1曾令浩
1 湖北省麻城市人民医院泌尿外科，湖北 麻城 438300 |
| 通讯: |
曾锋
Email: zengfengzf0@126.com |
| DOI: | 10.3978/j.issn.2095-6959.2016.04.004 |
摘要
目的：对比商环包皮环切术和传统包皮环切术治疗包茎及包皮过长的临床效果及并发症差异。方法：根据患者入院顺序将376例包茎及包皮患者分为商环组与传统组各188例，商环组采用商环包皮环切术、传统组采用包皮背部切开激光环切术治疗，比较两组患者的围手术期指标、术后并发症。结果：商环组的手术时间(4.3±1.2) min、术中出血量(2.0±0.6) mL、术中疼痛评分(1.1±0.7)分均显著的低于传统组、创口愈合时间(18.4±4.2) d显著的高于传统组且差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。商环组术后1、12、24 h的疼痛评分均显著的低于传统组且差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。商环组术后出血率、包皮水肿率均显著的低于传统组且差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)，商环组的术后外观满意度(86.84%)显著的高于传统组(65.79%)且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后商环组的IIEF-5、TSS评分均显著的高于传统组(P<0.05)。结论：商环包皮环切术较传统包皮环切术治疗包茎及包皮过长具有手术时间短、出血量少、术后并发症率低、恢复效果好的优势。
关键词：
商环包皮环切术
包皮背部切开激光环切术
包茎
包皮过长
The curative effect and complication of circumcision and traditional circumcision for circumcision
CorrespondingAuthor: ZENG Feng Email: zengfengzf0@126.com
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2095-6959.2016.04.004
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the clinical effect and complications between Shang ring circumcision and traditional circumcision for the treatment of phimosis and redundant prepuce. Methods: According to the order of admission, 376 cases of phimosis and prepuce patients were divided into quotient ring group (n=188) and traditional group (n=188), circumcision was used in the quotient ring group, traditional group used circumcision laser circumcision treatment, compared of perioperative and postoperative complications between the two groups. Results: Quotient ring group operative time (4.3±1.2) min, blood loss (2.0±0.6) mL, intraoperative pain score (1.1±0.7) were significantly lower than traditional group, wound healing time (18.4±4.2) d was significantly higher than the traditional group and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Quotient ring group after 1, 12, 24 h pain scores were significantly lower than the traditional group and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Quotient ring postoperative bleeding, foreskin edema were significantly lower than the traditional group and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), the appearance of satisfaction in quotient ring group (86.84%) significantly was higher than than the traditional group (65.79%), the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Postoperative IIEF-5, TSS scores of quotient ring group were significantly higher than the traditional group (P<0.05). Conclusion: Quotient ring circumcision more traditional circumcision treatment of phimosis and prepuce has a shorter operative time, less blood loss, postoperative complication rate, recovery effect good advantage.