经直肠前列腺穿刺活检术后两种压迫止血方法的比较

目的探讨经直肠超声引导下前列腺穿刺活检术后压迫止血的最佳方法。方法将2010年10月至2011年10月在解放军总院行前列腺穿刺活检术的76例患者按随机数字表法分成两组,观察组采用前列腺穿刺压迫止血垫压迫止血,对照组采用常规坐硬板凳方法压迫止血,两组压迫时间均为4h。比较两组患者术后肉眼血尿、镜下血尿、血便的发生率及持续时间,以及患者舒适度。结果观察组术后肉眼血尿、镜下血尿持续时间分别为(1.24±0.87)、(3.72±2.24)d,明显短于对照组的(1.97±1.81)、(6.56±2.26)d,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);舒适度差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论对于60~80岁老年患者,前列腺穿刺术后采用前列腺穿刺压迫止血垫压迫止血的效果优于坐硬板凳压迫止血。

Comparison of the Two Methods of Pressure Hemostasis after Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Biopsy

Objective To explore the best method of pressure hemostasis after transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy.Methods A total of 76 patients with operation of prostate biopsy were randomly divided into 2 groups.The observation group was oppressed 4 hours by using the pressure hemostasis mat and the control group was oppressed 4 hours conventionally.The incidence rate and duration time of the macroscopic hematuria,the microscopic hematuria,bloody stool and the comfort level of the patients were compared between two groups.Results The duration time of macroscopic hematuria and the microscopic hematuria was 1.24±0.87/d and 3.72±2.24/d in the observation group,and it was significantly shorter than which in control group（1.97±1.81day/6.56±2.26 day）（P〈0.5）.There was no significant statistical differences in the other observation index.Conclusion Pressure hemostasis is the optimal pressure hemostasis method to the patients who were 60-80 years old with an operation of prostate biopsy.