圣环包皮环切术与传统手术效果比较

目的：对比分析圣环包皮环切术与传统手术的疗效和术后并发症。方法包皮环切术241例,按门诊单双日分为圣环包皮环切术组（134例）和传统手术组（107例）。比较手术时间、失血量、术后并发症,疼痛评分（视觉模拟评分法, VAS）,外观满意度及勃起功能。结果手术均顺利,圣环手术时间（7.70±1.30） min,失血量（1.60±1.20）ml,术后外观满意度100%（134/134）,国际勃起功能评分（IIEF-5评分）（23.40±3.33）分,传统手术组分别为（28.6±9.3） min,（13.20±2.50）ml,68.22%（73/107）,（23.21±3.36）分,以上前3项均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,第四项无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论圣环包皮环切术具有手术时间短,术中出血量少,术后并发症少,外观满意度高等优点。

Sheng Ring circumcision versus conventional surgical procedures Comparison of clinical effectiveness

Objective To compare the efficacy and complications of the Sheng Ring circumcision with those of conventional surgical procedures. Methods A total of 241 patients, 173 with redundant prepuce and 68 with phimosis, were randomly assigned to receive the Sheng Ring circumcision （n=134） and conventional surgical procedures （n=107）. Comparisons were made between the two groups in the surgical duration, blood loss, as well as postoperative complications, pain score, satisfaction with the penile appearance, and the quality of sexual life. Results The surgical duration, blood loss, postoperative satisfaction and IIRF-5 score were （7. 70±1. 30） min, （1. 60±1. 20） ml, 100% （134 /134） and 23. 40±3. 33, respectively, in the Sheng Ring group as compared with （28. 6±9. 3） min, （13. 20±2. 50） ml, 68.22%（73 /107） and 23. 21±3.36 in the conventional surgery group, with statistically significant differences in the first three parameters （P〈0. 05）, but not in IIRF-5 score （P〉0. 05）. Conclusion Compared with the conventional surgical procedures, the Sheng Ring circumcision has the advantages of shorter operation time, less blood loss, fewer complications, better penile appearance.