小切口阑尾切除术 126 例临床分析

目的探讨小切口阑尾切除术与传统阑尾切除术的效果。方法回顾性分析该院2009年1月-2013年6月收治的240例阑尾炎患者，随机分为观察组126例和对照组114例，观察组采取小切口阑尾切除术治疗，对照组采取传统切口治疗。比较两组患者切口长度、手术时间、住院时间、进食时间和术后切151感染率。结果两组患者在手术时间上比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05），观察组在切口长度、进食时间及住院时间均低于对照组，各项指标差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05），患者切口类型对其术后感染的发生率影响较大，观察组患者切口感染发生率为2例（1．59％），而对照组患者切口感染发生率为8例（7．02％），两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈O．05），观察组护理服务满意度显著优于对照组，两者相比差异有统计学意义（P〈O．05）。结论小切口阑尾切除术治疗阑尾炎的手术效果明显优于传统切口的，其创伤小，恢复快，值得在临床推广。

Clinical Analysis of 126 Cases of Small Incision Appendectomy Resection

Objective To investigate the effect of small incision appendectomy and conventional appendectomy. Methods 240 cas- es of appendicitis patients admitted in our hospital from January, 2009 to June, 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into observation group of 126 cases and control group of 114 cases. The observation group was given small incision appendectomy, and the control group was given conventional appendectomy. The incision length, operation time, hospitalization time, eating time and postoperative incision infection rate were compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistical- ly significant difference between two groups in operation time （P〉0.05）. The incision length, feeding time and hospitalization time of the observation group were lower than those of the control group, the differences were statistically significant （P〈0.05）. The inci- sion type of the patients has great influence on the postoperative infection incidence. In the observation group, incision infection occurred in 2 cases （1.59%）, while in the control group, incision infection occurred in 8 cases （7.02%）, the difference had signifi- cant difference （P〈0.05）. The nursing service satisfaction of the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group, the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）. Conclusion For appendicitis, the effect of small incision appendectomy is superior to that of conventional appendectomy with the advantages of smaller trauma and quicker recovery, and which is worthy of clinical promotion.