输尿管皮肤造口两种不同引流方式的临床分析

目的比较输尿管皮肤造口两种不同引流方式的优缺点,指导临床护理及选择。方法回顾我院于2008年6月～2011年6月期间收治行输尿管皮肤造口术病人40例,分成造口袋引流组(20例)和导尿管引流组(20例),比较两种不同引流方式的护理不同点、相关并发症及造价等。结果输尿管皮肤造口通过造口袋引流组(造口袋组)的并发症明显少于导尿管引流组(导尿管组)(P<0.05),但造口袋引流组临床费用较高,造口袋组术后患者的恢复有明显优势。结论通过造口袋引流输尿管皮肤造口术后的并发症少,病人恢复快,有较好的临床价值,值得推广。

Clinical Analysis of two different drainage methods caused by ureterostomy

Objective To compares merits and shortcomings of the two drainage methods,guide the clinical nursing and select the appropriate method.Methods Forty cases in our hospital from June 2008 to June 2011,who had the operation of urine opening trans skin,we divide them into two groups,one is the use of stoma bag(twenty cases),and another is use of catheter(twenty cases),then compared the differences of nursing,relative syndrome,prices,and so on.Results The syndrome of cases about stoma bag is fewer than cases about catheter,but the cost is more(P<0.05).Conclusions Drainage by stoma bag has fewer syndromes and is helpful for the recovery of the patients,so it is worth popularizing.