陈旧性肛裂手术两种麻醉方法效果比较

为了为陈旧性肛裂手术患者寻求一种安全有效的麻醉方法，对122例陈旧性肛裂患者分别在骶管麻醉（治疗组，62例）或局部麻醉（对照组，60例）下行手术治疗，跟踪观察麻醉止痛效果和肛门松弛效果。结果显示，（1）麻醉止痛效果：治疗组显效59例（95．2％），有效3例（4．8％），无效0例；对照组显效21例（35．0％），有效39例（65．0%），无效0例；治疗组显效率明显高于对照组，P〈0．05。（2）麻醉后肛门松弛效果：治疗组显效59例（95．2％），有效3例（4．8％），无效0例；对照组显效15例（25．0％），有效39例（65．0％），无效6例（10．0％）；治疗组显效率明显高于对照组，P〈0．05。结果表明，陈旧性肛裂患者骶管麻醉下手术安全可靠，止痛效果和肛门松弛效果好。

Comparison of Two Anesthetic Methods during Operation for Chronic Anal Fissure

Sixty two patients with chronic anal fissure underwent sacral anesthesia（the study group） and 60 cases with chronic anal fissure underwent local anesthesia（the control group） during anal fissure operation, then anesthetic and analgesic efficacy and anal laxation of the two groups were observed and compared each other, thus to find out a safe and effective anesthetic method. As results, the anesthetic and analgesic effica- cy was excellent in 59 cases vs 21 cases,good in 3 vs 39 and ineffective in 0 vs 0（95.2% vs 35.0%,4.8% vs 65.0% and 0 vs 0） in the study group and the control group（ P〈0. 05）;while anal laxation was excellent in 59 cases（95.2%） vs 15 cases（25.0%） ,good in 3 cases（4.8%） vs 39 cases（65.0%） and ineffective in 0 vs 6 cases（10.0%） in the study and control group（ P〈0.05）. It is concluded that sacral anesthesia is safe and reliable during chronic anal fissure operation in terms of better analgesic efficacy and better anal laxation.