| 摘要: |
| ［摘要］ 目的 比较两种不同类型包皮环切缝合器行包皮环切术的临床效果。方法 回顾性分析青岛滨海学院附属医院及青岛市第三人民医院泌尿外科2019年8月至2021年10月230例使用一次性包皮环切缝合器（DCSD）行包皮环切术患者的临床资料。根据患者自身意愿，以使用DCSD类型不同分为观察组129例和对照组101例。观察组采用单纯宽吻合钉缝合的DCSD；对照组采用吻合钉联合硅胶垫片缝合的DCSD。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后2 h疼痛评分、术后第一次换药疼痛评分、术后10 d水肿程度、完全脱钉时间、术后1个月未完全脱钉例数、术后血肿发生率、术后感染发生率、切口裂开率以及术后3个月患者满意度。结果 两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后2 h疼痛评分结果比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。观察组术后第一次换药疼痛评分及术后10 d水肿程度评分显著低于对照组（P<0.05）。对照组完全脱钉时间及术后1个月未完全脱钉例数结果显著优于观察组（P<0.05）。两组术后血肿发生率及切口裂开率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。观察组术后感染发生率显著低于对照组（P<0.05）。两组术后3个月患者满意度比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 与单纯宽吻合钉缝合的DCSD相比，吻合钉联合硅胶垫片缝合的DCSD显著改善了脱钉情况，不足之处在于其近期水肿及感染率更高，换药时疼痛评分更高，但两组患者的远期效果相似。 |
| 关键词: 包皮环切术 一次性包皮环切缝合器 包皮过长 包茎 回顾性研究 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674-3806.2022.07.16 |
| 分类号:R 699.8 |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Comparison of clinical effects of two different types of disposable circumcision suture devices in circumcision |
|
LI Kui, SUN Yan-bo, WANG Feng-yao, et al.
|
|
Department of Urology, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao Binhai University(Qingdao Military-civil Integration Hospital), Shandong 266000, China
|
| Abstract: |
| ［Abstract］ Objective To compare the clinical effects of two different types of disposable circumcision suture devices in circumcision. Methods From August 2019 to October 2021, the clinical data of 230 patients who underwent circumcision using a disposable circumcision suture device(DCSD) at Department of Urology, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao Binhai University and Department of Urology, the Third People′s Hospital of Qingdao were retrospectively analyzed. According to the patients′ wishes to receive the different types of DCSD, they were divided into the observation group(129 cases) and the control group(101 cases). The observation group was treated with DCSD and sutured with single-wide anastomotic nails. The control group was treated with DCSD and sutured with anastomotic nails combined with silicone pad. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, pain scores 2 hours after operation, pain scores of the first dressing change after operation, the degree of edema 10 days after operation, the time of complete nail removal, the number of cases with incomplete nail removal 1 month after operation, the incidence of postoperative hematoma, the incidence of postoperative infection, the incidence of incision dehiscence and the patients′ satisfaction 3 months after operation were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences between the two groups in the results of the operation time, the intraoperative blood loss and the pain scores 2 hours after operation(P>0.05). The pain scores of the first dressing change after operation and the degree of edema 10 days after operation in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group(P<0.05). The results of the time of complete nail removal and the number of cases with incomplete nail removal 1 month after operation in the control group were significantly better than those in the observation group(P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative hematoma and the incidence of incision dehiscence between the two groups(P>0.05). The incidence of postoperative infection in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the patients′ satisfaction between the two groups 3 months after operation(P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with the DCSD of single-wide anastomotic nails, the DCSD of anastomotic nails combined with silicone pad sutures significantly improves the situation of nail removal, but the disadvantages of the latter method are that the rate of short-term edema and the rate of infection are higher, and that the pain scores during dressing change are higher. However, the long-term effects of the two groups are similar. |
| Key words: Circumcision Disposable circumcision suture device(DCSD) Redundant prepuce Phimosis Retrospective study |
