TAPP与传统腹股沟疝无张力修补术对成人腹股沟疝手术应激及疼痛影响的对比研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2021.04.007

摘要
图/表
参考文献(15)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (1167 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 【目的】 对比经腹腹膜前腹腔镜疝修补术(TAPP)与传统腹股沟疝无张力修补术对成人腹股沟疝手术应激及疼痛的影响。【方法】 选取本院2016年1月至2020年1月收治的74例成人腹股沟疝患者,根据手术时间分为对照组(2016年1月至2018年1月,37例)和TAPP组(2018年2月至2020年1月,37例)。对照组接受传统腹股沟疝无张力修补术,TAPP组接受TAPP。对比两组手术指标、并发症、疼痛评分(VAS评分)、应激指标及炎症指标。【结果】 TAPP组手术时间、术后下床时间、术后住院时间、胃肠功能恢复时间均短于对照组(均P<0.05),术中出血量低于对照组(P<0.05),住院费用高于对照组(P<0.05)。TAPP组皮瓣感染或坏死率(0.00%)及总并发症发生率(10.81%)低于对照组(0.00%、35.14%,均P<0.05)。TAPP组术后6 h、24 h、3 d 的VAS评分均低于对照组(均P<0.05)。治疗后1 d两组丙二醛(MDA)、白细胞介素6(IL-6)均较治疗前增高(均P<0.05),SOD较治疗前降低(均P<0.05),TAPP组MDA、IL-6低于对照组(均P<0.05),SOD高于对照组(P<0.05)。【结论】 与传统腹股沟疝无张力修补术相比,TAPP安全性高、术后恢复快,对应激反应及炎症反应的影响较小,值得临床推广应用。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	王伟
	赵宇斌

关键词 ：疝,腹股沟/外科学, 腹腔镜检查, 应激,生理学, 疼痛, 手术后

Abstract：【Objective】 To compare the effects of laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal prosthesis (TAPP) and traditional inguinal hernia tension-free repair on stress and pain in adult inguinal hernia. 【Methods】 Seventy-four adult patients with inguinal hernia admitted to Our hospital from January 2016 to January 2020 were selected and divided into a control group (January 2016 to January 2018, 37 cases) and TAPP group(From February 2018 to January 2020, 37 cases) according to the operation time . The control group received traditional tension-free inguinal hernia repair, and the TAPP group received TAPP. The operation indexes, complications, pain scores (VAS scores), stress indexes and inflammation indexes were compared between the two groups. 【Results】 The operation time, postoperative bed time, postoperative hospital stay, and gastrointestinal function recovery time of the TAPP group were shorter than those of the control group (all P<0.05), and the intraoperative blood loss was lower than that of the control group (P<0.05), but the cost was higher than the control group (P<0.05). The flap infection or necrosis rate (0.00%) and total complication rate (10.81%) in the TAPP group were lower than those in the control group (0.00%, 35.14%, all P<0.05). The VAS scores of the TAPP group at 6h, 24h and 3 days after operation were lower than those of the control group (all P<0.05). One day after treatment, the MDA, CRP, and PCT in both groups were higher than before treatment (all P<0.05), and SOD was lower than before treatment (all P<0.05). The MDA, CRP, and PCT in the TAPP group were lower than those in the control group (all P<0.05), SOD was higher than the control group (P<0.05). 【Conclusion】 Compared with the traditional tension-free inguinal hernia repair, TAPP has higher safety and quicker postoperative recovery, and has less impact on stress and inflammation.

Key words： Hernia,Inguinal /SU Laparoscopy Stress,Physiological Pain,Postoperative

收稿日期: 2020-11-24

中图分类号:

R656.21

通讯作者: * E-mail:2690223005@qq.com

引用本文:

王伟, 赵宇斌. TAPP与传统腹股沟疝无张力修补术对成人腹股沟疝手术应激及疼痛影响的对比研究[J]. 医学临床研究, 2021, 38(4): 504-507.
WANG Wei, ZHAO Yu-bin. Comparative Study of TAPP and Traditional Inguinal Hernia Tension-free Repair on Stress and Pain in Adult Inguinal Hernia. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RESEARCH, 2021, 38(4): 504-507.

链接本文:

http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2021.04.007 或 http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/CN/Y2021/V38/I4/504

[1] 元海成,董国强,张楠, 等.腹股沟复发疝治疗现状及研究进展[J].中国中西医结合外科杂志,2019,25(6):1070-1073.
[2] SCHEUERMANN U. Transabdominal Preperitoneal (TAPP) versus Lichtenstein operation for primary inguinal hernia repair-A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J].BMC Surg,2017,17(1): 55.
[3] 任少勋,党涛平,王晓东.腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术与开放无张力腹股沟疝术治疗腹股沟疝价值分析[J].山西医药杂志,2020,49(4):426-428.
[4] 陈继安,靳小建,陈永军, 等.成人腹股沟嵌顿疝治疗新进展[J].中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版),2018,12(4):249-251.
[5] KOCKERLING F,BITTNER R,KUTHE A,et al. TEP or TAPP for recurrent inguinal hernia repair-register-based comparison of the outcome[J].Surg Endosc,2017,31(10): 3872-3882.
[6] 中华医学会外科学分会疝与腹壁外科学组,中国医师协会外科医师分会疝和腹壁外科医师委员会.成人腹股沟疝诊断和治疗指南(2018年版)[J].中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版),2018,12(4):244-246.
[7] 唐伟.腹腔镜下经腹腔腹膜前补片植入术治疗腹股沟疝的临床疗效[J].江苏医药,2018,44(9):1030-1032.
[8] 裴元民,孙学玲,董国民.腹股沟疝传统修补术与无张力修补术对比[J].中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版),2013,7(4):314-315.
[9] 梁国栋,徐壮,杨玉波.腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术和李金斯坦手术对老年腹股沟疝患者的临床疗效[J].中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版),2019,13(6):589-592.
[10] 王小文,周松.可吸收补片在腹股沟疝修补术中的应用[J].临床外科杂志,2019,27(9):819-821.
[11] 叶金松,马春华.腹膜前间隙无张力疝修补术与平片无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的效果对照及复发的影响[J].中国中西医结合外科杂志,2019,25(2):196-199.
[12] HERNIA SURGE GROUP.International guidelines for groin hernia management[J].Hernia,2018,22(1): 1-165.
[13] 陈元岩.腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术与开放无张力疝修补创伤反应的对比研究[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2018,23(10):750-752.
[14] BITTNER R,SCHWARZ J. Primary unilateral not complicated inguinal hernia: our choice of TAPP, why, results and review of literature[J].Hernia,2019,23(3): 417-428.
[15] 龚义军,任军,谢泽民, 等.TAPP术治疗成人腹股沟疝的疗效及对其炎性应激及疼痛的影响分析[J].空军医学杂志,2019,35(4):328-330.