改良包皮环切术的临床评价

目的评价改良包皮环切治疗包皮过长的临床手术效果。方法107例(A组)包皮过长患者行改良包皮环切术,92例(B组)行阴茎根部皮肤环切术,81例(C组)行传统包皮环切术。对三组的手术时间、术中出血及术后创口出血、血肿、水肿、感染等并发症进行比较。结果A组术中出血量为(4±1)m l,B组为(3±1)m l,C组为(16±2)m l;A组术后发生创口水肿、出血、感染1例,B组5例,C组15例。B组术后外观明显臃肿5例。A、C组无臃肿。C组8例诉勃起后侧弯,A、B组的术后并发症与C组比较,差异均有统计学意义;A、B两组在术中出血和术后感染两方面均优于C组,A组在术后外观方面优于B、C组,其中B组外观差主要是臃肿,而C组为勃起后的侧弯;B组在手术时间方面明显长于A、C两组。结论改良包皮环切术优于阴茎根部皮肤环切术及传统的包皮环切术,治疗包皮过长效果好,值得临床选用。

Clinical Evaluation of Reforming Circumcision

Objective To evaluate the operation efficacy of reforming circumcision for treatment of redundant prepuce.Methods The reforming circumcision of prepuce was performed on 107 cases of redundant prepuce patients(group A).The circumcision of the root-skin of penis was performed on 92 cases of redundant prepuce patients(group B).Group C(another 81 cases)were treated with the traditional circumcision of prepuce.The time and bleeding during operation and postoperative complications(bleeding,hematoma,dropsy,infection,and malformation,etc)were compared among the 3 groups.Results Intraoperative hemorrhagic amount was(4±1)ml in group A,(3±l)ml in group B and(16±2)ml in group C;Post-operative bleeding/hematoma,dropsy and infection of wound in group A were 1case;while those in group B were 3 cases:and 15 cases in group C.Post-operative fat and clumsy cutting edge in group B were 5 cases;While there was no fat and clumsy cutting edge in group A and group C.8 cases of lateral curvature were found in group C.The differences of postoperative complications between group A and C,group A and B or group B and C were statistically significant;The operation time in group B was longer than that of group A and C.Conclusion The reforming circumcision is the best choice in treatment of redundant prepuce and the circumcision of the root-skin of penis is better,and is worth of spreading.