摘要
目的比较两种疝修补装置的疗效。方法分别采用美国巴德公司产网塞(Bard meshplug)和美国强生公司产普理灵三维疝装置(Prolene 3D Patch)为修补材料行无张力疝修补术65例(Plug组)和60例(3D Patch组),比较两组临床资料。结果Plug组60例平均随访16.2个月,3D Patch组57例随访15.7个月。两组病人平均手术时间、平均住院时间、恢复日常生活时间、手术并发症、平均费用和术后复发率差异无显著性意义(P>0.05)。但3D Patch组术后腹股沟区疼痛不适、异物感发生率明显少于Plug组(P<0.05)。结论巴德网塞及普理灵三维疝装置都能很好地对腹股沟疝行无张力修补,前者适用于腹膜较薄或腹膜与腹横筋膜粘连严重但腹横筋膜缺损不大者;后者则对腹横筋膜或疝环缺损大的病人更为适宜。
Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of Bard mesh plug and Prolene 31） patch in inguinal hernia patients. Methods Hernia repair was performed by using Bard mesh plug（ plug group）in 65 cases and Prolene 3D patch（3D patch group） in 60 cases as the repair materials. Clinical data of beth groups was analyzed retrospectively. Results The patients were followed up for 16.2 months in plug group and 15. 7months in the 3D patch group respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the operation time, hospital stay, time for returning to work, operative complications, cost of treatment and recurrence rate. However, in the aspects of postoperative pain in the groin ,and foreign body sensation, the outcome of mean in 3D patch group was significantly less than that in plug group （ P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion Both Bard mesh plug and Prolene 3D patch can be used effectively in tensionfree herniorrhaphy. Bard mesh plug adapts especially to the week peritoneum patients or peritoneum conglutinate with transversails fascia severely while transversails fascia defect is not that big. Prolene 3D patch adapts especially to the patients of big defect of transversails fascia or hernia ring.
出处
《中国现代手术学杂志》
2007年第5期355-357,共3页
Chinese Journal of Modern Operative Surgery
关键词
疝
腹股沟
疝修补术
无张力
hernia, inguinal
hernioplasty, tension-free
