两种手术方法治疗腹股沟疝的疗效比较

目的对比分析无张力疝修补术和传统疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的临床效果。方法选择2010年9月～2012年3月在我院应用无张力修补术治疗腹股沟疝的患者36例．设立为观察组：另选择同期行传统疝修补术治疗的腹沟股疝患者30例设立为对照组，观察并比较观察组与对照组手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床活动时间、住院时间及并发症发生率情况。结果观察组术中出血量（11．1±3．2）mL，明显少于对照组（17．5±5．4）mL，术后下床活动时间（2．0±0．6）d，明显快于对照组（4．3±1．2）d，且观察组术后住院时间（4．1±1．0）d，明显短于对照组的住院时间（6．2±2．7）d，两组比较差异具有显著性（P〈0．05）。观察组术后并发症发生率达13．9％，其中尿潴留1例，阴囊血肿及水肿2例，明显低于对照组并发症的发生率（63.3％），对照组尿潴留4例，阴囊血肿及水肿6例，切口感染3例，两组并发症发生率比较差异有显著性（P〈0．05）。结论无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝疗效明显优于传统疝修补术，具有术中出血少、术后并发症少、住院时间短等优点，值得推广和应用。

Comparison of the efficacy of two surgical treatment of inguinal hernia

Objective To explore and analyze the tension-free hernia repair and the traditional hernia repair of in gninal hernia clinical effect. Methods From September 2010 to March 2012, 36 cases of patients with tension-free repair of inguinal hernia, the establishment of the observation group, and other selected traditional hernia repair treat ment concomitant the groin femoral hernia 30 patients established as control group, observed and compared the opera- tive time, blood loss, postoperative ambulation time, duration of hospitalization and the incidence of complications of observation group and the control group. Results The blood loss in the observation group was （11.1±3.2）mL,the blood loss in the control group was （17.5±5.4） mL, the postoperative ambulation time of the observation group was （2.0±0.6） d ,was faster than the control group （4.3±1.2） d, postoperative hospital stay in the observation group was （4.1±l.0）d and postoperative hospital stay in the control group was （6.2±2.7） d, the difference was significant （P 〈 0.05）. Observation group postoperative complications rate of 13.9%, urinary retention in 1 case, scrotal hematoma and edema in two cases, was significantly lower than the control group, the incidence of complications was 63.3%, the difference was statistically significant （P 〈 0.05 ）. Control group had urinary retention in 4 cases, scrotal hematoma and edema in ,6 cases, wound infection three cases： Conclusion The tension-free hernia repair treatment of inguinal hernia were significantly better than traditional hernia repair, less blood loss, fewer complications, shorter hospital stay, worthy of promotion and application.