| 小儿肠套叠空气灌肠和水压灌肠复位的对比分析 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 马海峰,董贺龙,周福金,董晓松,陈其民. 小儿肠套叠空气灌肠和水压灌肠复位的对比分析[J]. 现代医药卫生, 2011, 27(11): 1611-1612 |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 马海峰 董贺龙 周福金 董晓松 陈其民 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 1. 沈阳市儿童医院,辽宁,沈阳,110001
2. 上海儿童医学中心,上海,200127 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目的:探讨小儿肠套叠空气灌肠和水压灌肠复位的疗效.方法:对比分析128例采用空气灌肠复位和116例采用水压灌肠复位小儿急性肠套叠复位成功率,复位时间,复发率,穿孔率,恢复时间.结果:空气灌肠和水压灌肠复位治疗小儿肠套叠在复位成功率,复发率,穿孔率和恢复时间上差异无显著性,二者只在复位时间上有所差异,空气灌肠时间短于水压灌肠时间.结论:空气灌肠复位和水压灌肠复位治疗小儿肠套叠均是安全的、有良好的疗效.空气灌肠在操作方便性方面更有优势,但患儿暴露在放射线下,对健康有一定的危害.
|
| 关 键 词： | 空气灌肠 水压灌肠 肠套叠 疗效 |
Comparative analysis between air enema reduction and hydrostatic enema reduction in treatment of intussusception |
| |
| MA Hai-feng , DONG He-long , ZHOU Fu-jin , DONG Xiao-song , CHEN Qi-min. Comparative analysis between air enema reduction and hydrostatic enema reduction in treatment of intussusception[J]. JOURNAL OF MODERN MEDICINE & HEALTH, 2011, 27(11): 1611-1612 |
| |
| Authors: | MA Hai-feng DONG He-long ZHOU Fu-jin DONG Xiao-song CHEN Qi-min |
| |
| Affiliation: | MA Hai-feng1,DONG He-long1,ZHOU Fu-jin1,DONG Xiao-song1,CHEN Qi-min2 |
| |
| Abstract: | Objective:To explore the efficacy of air enema reduction and hydrostatic enema reduction in treating children intussusception.Methods:To comparatively analyze the reposition success rate,reposition time,recurrent rate,perforation rate and recovery time of acute children intussusception between 128 cases of air enema reduction and 116 cases of hydrostatic enema reduction.Results:Air enema reduction and hydrostatic enema reduction had no statistical significant difference in the reposition success rate,reposi... |
| |
| Keywords: | Air enema Hydrostatic enema Intussusception Treatment |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
|
