切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 07 ›› Issue (03) : 223 -227. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2018.03.005

所属专题: 文献

论著

吻合器痔上黏膜C形切除钉合术治疗环状脱垂痔的临床观察
张义1, 连少雄1, 刘丙1, 林清1, 吕腾1, 伍桂友1,()   
  1. 1. 438000 黄冈市中医医院肛肠科
  • 收稿日期:2017-11-19 出版日期:2018-06-25
  • 通信作者: 伍桂友

Clinical observation of the treatment of annular prolapse hemorrhoid by type-C therapy stapler

Yi Zhang1, Shaoxiong Lian1, Bing Liu1, Qing Lin1, Teng Lyv1, Guiyou Wu1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Anorectal Surgery, Traditional Chinese Medical Hospital of Huanggang, Huanggang 438000, China
  • Received:2017-11-19 Published:2018-06-25
  • Corresponding author: Guiyou Wu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Wu Guiyou, Email:
引用本文:

张义, 连少雄, 刘丙, 林清, 吕腾, 伍桂友. 吻合器痔上黏膜C形切除钉合术治疗环状脱垂痔的临床观察[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2018, 07(03): 223-227.

Yi Zhang, Shaoxiong Lian, Bing Liu, Qing Lin, Teng Lyv, Guiyou Wu. Clinical observation of the treatment of annular prolapse hemorrhoid by type-C therapy stapler[J]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2018, 07(03): 223-227.

目的

探讨吻合器痔上黏膜C形切除钉合术(TCT)在治疗环状脱垂痔的临床应用价值。

方法

回顾分析黄冈市中医医院肛肠科自2015年6月至2016年6月共收治116例环状脱垂痔的临床资料,随机分组:实验组采用TCT(TCT组,60例),对照组采用常规PPH(PPH组,56例),两组患者均采用同型号一次性肛肠吻合器,TCT组使用本科设计C形术式撑肛器,对照组使用常规的PPH组件。将两组患者在一般临床资料、术中及术后各方面情况进行分析对比。

结果

TCT组的手术时间(20.1±6.3 min)少于PPH组(25.2±6.9 min),差异有统计学意义(t=2.10,P=0.004);TCT组的术中出血量(6.5±1.2 ml)少于PPH组(13.6±2.6 ml),差异有统计学意义(t=2.21,P=0.001);TCT组的疼痛持续时间(1.5±0.4 h)短于PPH组(5.0±0.6 h),差异有统计学意义(t=2.05,P=0.000);TCT组的住院时间(6.1±0.6 d)少于PPH组(6.9±0.5 d),差异有统计学意义(t=1.78,P=0.002);TCT组的吻合口继发大出血(0%)少于PPH组(8.9%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.010);TCT组的吻合口狭窄(0%)少于PPH组为(8.9%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.010);TCT组的肛门坠胀(1.7%)少于PPH组(14.3%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.014);TCT组的尿潴留(5%)少于PPH组(21.4%),差异有统计学意义(P=0.011)。

结论

TCT组在手术时间、术中出血量、疼痛持续时间、住院时间、吻合口继发大出血、吻合口狭窄、肛门坠胀、尿潴留等情况要优于常规PPH组,对环状脱垂痔的治疗,可以采用TCT代替PPH,值得临床推广应用。

Objective

To explore the clinical application value of type-C therapy stapler (TCT) in the treatment of annular prolapse hemorrhoids.

Methods

The clinical data of 116 cases of annular prolapse hemorrhoids were collected from June 2015 to June 2016 in Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Huanggang. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: The experimental group was treated with TCT (TCT group, 60 cases), The control group was treated with conventional PPH (56 cases in PPH group), TCT group using our design C-type surgery to hold the anal device, the control group using conventional PPH components. The two groups of patients in the general clinical data, surgery and postoperative aspects of the situation were analyzed and compared.

Results

The operation time in the TCT group (20.1±6.3 min) was less than that in the PPH group (25.2±6.9 min), the difference was statistically significant (t=2.10, P=0.004). The intraoperative blood loss in the TCT group (6.5±1.2 ml) was less than that in the PPH group (13.6±2.6 ml), the difference was statistically significant (t=2.21, P= 0.001). The duration of pain in the TCT group (1.5±0.4 h) was shorter than that in the PPH group (5.0±0.6 h), the difference was statistically significant (t=2.05, P=0.000); The time of hospitalization in TCT group (6.1±0.6 d) was less than that in PPH group (6.9± 0.5 d), the difference was statistically significant (t=1.78, P=0.002). TCT group of anastomotic secondary bleeding (0%) less than PPH group (8.9%), the difference was statistically significant (P=0.010). The stenosis of the TCT group (0%) was less than that of the PPH group (8.9%), the difference was statistically significant (P=0.010); The anal bulge of TCT group (1.7%) was less than that of PPH group (14.3%), the difference was statistically significant (P=0.014); The urinary retention in the TCT group (5%) was less than that in the PPH group (21.4%), the difference was statistically significant (P=0.011).

Conclusion

TCT group was superior to conventional PPH group in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, pain duration, hospitalization time, anastomotic secondary hemorrhage, anastomotic stenosis, anal bulge and urinary retention, Treatment of annular prolapse hemorrhoids, TCT can be used instead of PPH, worthy of clinical application.

图6 切除的标本
表1 两组患者术前临床资料的比较
表2 两组患者术中及术后一般情况比较
表3 两组术后并发症比较(例、%)
[1]
王业皇, 章阳, 严进, 等. 开环式微创吻合器治疗痔病的临床效果 [J]. 江苏医药, 2010, 36(11): 1249-1251.
[2]
Longo A.Treatment of hemorrhoids disease by reduction of mucosa and hemorrhoids prolapse with a circular suturing device: a new procedure [C]. 6th Word Congress of Endoscopic Surgery, Rome, 1998: 777-784.
[3]
Ommer A, Hinrichs J, Mollenberg H, et al. Long-term results after stapled hemorrhoidopexy: a prospective study with a 6-year follow-up [J]. Dis colon Rectunm, 2011, 54(5): 601-608.
[4]
Ho KS, Ho YH. Prospective randomized trial comparing stapled hemorrhoido pexy versus closed Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy [J]. Tech Coloproctol, 2006, 10(3): 193-197.
[5]
Garcea G, Sutton CD, Lloyd TD, et al .Management of benign rectal strictures [J]. Dis colon Rectum, 2003, 46(11): 1451-1460.
[6]
卫军, 季利江, 翁立平, 等. TST手术治疗痔疮临床观察与体会 [J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2017, 6(2): 147-149.
[7]
杨向东, 贾英天, 赵希忠, 等. TST术后常见并发症的原因及对策(附100例临床报告) [J]. 结直肠肛门外科, 2013, 17(2): 101-102.
[8]
郑晨果, 金纯, 金定国. 保留直肠后壁黏膜的吻合器痔上黏膜环切钉合术临床疗效分析 [J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志 2014, 17(12): 1205-1207.
[9]
汪建平, 黄美近. 吻合器痔上黏膜环形切除术在中国开展的概况 [J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2004, 7(4): 258-259.
[10]
林宏城, 李娟, 任东林. 选择性痔上黏膜切除钉合术:一种更加微创的吻合器痔上黏膜切除钉合术 [J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2014, 17(12): 1235-1237.
[11]
丁泽民, 李柏年, 丁义江. 中医肛肠科病证诊断疗效标准 [S]. 南京; 南京大学出版社, 1994.
[1] 帕丽旦·热吉甫, 姑丽尼格尔·吾不力哈斯木, 张媛, 杨武明, 路明. 四种手术方式治疗痔病的网状Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2022, 16(01): 74-80.
[2] 帕丽旦·热吉甫, 张媛, 杨武明, 尼加提·塔西甫拉提, 康蓓, 韩瑞, 路明. 痔上黏膜环切钉合术与多普勒超声引导下痔动脉结扎术治疗痔病的Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2021, 15(06): 459-465.
[3] 王勋, 石荣, 王菁. 新型可自由选择调节开环的痔上黏膜手术暴露辅助器械在痔吻合器手术中应用的临床疗效研究[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 319-325.
[4] 袁晨晨, 薛蓉, 金纯, 郑晨果, 周崇俊. 吻合器痔上黏膜适形切除钉合术治疗Ⅲ~Ⅳ度环状混合痔的临床疗效分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 120-126.
[5] 陈少虹, 李永富, 罗刚沣, 黄炫璋, 龚莉, 颜显欣, 马民. RPH联合MMH与PPH治疗重度混合痔的疗效对比的Meta分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(06): 621-630.
[6] 胡邦, 邹齐, 陆立, 任东林. 《中国痔病诊疗指南(2020)》解读及其与欧美指南的对比[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(06): 561-571.
[7] 王万里, 邓台燕, 樊文彬, 杜忠群. 痔上黏膜环形切除钉合术(PPH)再思考[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(05): 514-519.
[8] 帕丽旦·热吉甫, 杨润清, 张媛, 杨武明, 路明. PPH术后吻合口狭窄危险因素分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(05): 482-486.
[9] 邓俊晖, 肖凯华, 陈志玉, 黄稳达, 杨家君, 黄玉宝, 黄学军. 吻合器部分痔环切钉合联合选择性内痔缝扎术治疗环状痔的可行性和疗效[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(04): 413-417.
[10] 马良欢, 金黑鹰, 王俊, 王灿. 环状混合痔的术式选择[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(03): 232-236.
[11] 高英杰, 王阳, 王丽红, 毕文静, 刘卫民. VWF基因突变导致混合痔术后大出血一例报告并文献复习[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 496-498.
[12] 张立, 田泽阳, 张海旺, 徐晨龙, 方多多, 倪秀茹. 选择性痔上黏膜吻合术与吻合器痔上黏膜环切术治疗重度混合痔的效果比较[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(09): 678-682.
[13] 谢慧, 李和坤, 顾紫薇, 张楠, 张连城. 针灸治疗痔疮的研究进展[J]. 中华针灸电子杂志, 2021, 10(03): 111-113.
[14] 张楠, 王洋, 周纪妹, 任建庄, 段旭华, 韩新巍, 邝东林. 经导管动脉栓塞治疗内痔破裂大出血一例[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2021, 09(04): 456-457.
[15] 李贞娟, 丁辉, 王艺, 胡珊珊, 白阳秋, 杨惠, 邝胜利, 张慧敏, 徐闪闪, 李修岭. 参照肛直线的内镜下套扎术治疗Ⅰ-Ⅲ度内痔临床效果研究[J]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2022, 09(02): 76-81.
阅读次数
全文


摘要