摘要
目的对比分析湿润烧伤膏佐治改良性包皮环切术的疗效。方法收集我院自2014年1月1日—2015年12月31日泌尿外科门诊及住院包皮过长和包茎患者,按单双号随机分组将包皮过长和包茎患者分为试验组(湿润烧伤膏佐治改良性包皮环切术组)与对照组(一次性包皮环切吻合器包皮环切术组),每组50例。对比分析两组在手术时间、切口愈合时间、术后水肿发生率、术后阴茎外观以及患者满意率等方面的差别,进行回顾性研究和分析。结果试验组与对照组的手术时间比较差异无统计学意义,但试验组术后水肿发生率4%(2/50),较对照组术后水肿发生率38%(19/50)低、切口愈合时间短,术后患者满意度高,二者比较差异有统计学意义。结论湿润烧伤膏佐治改良性包皮环切术具有操作简单、术后水肿发生率低、术后愈合时间短及患者满意率高等优点。
Objective To compare and analyse the clinical curative effects on improved circumcision by using MEBO. Methods From January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015, we collected outpatients and hospitalized patients with long circumcision and phimosis in department of urology. Patients with redundant prepuce and phimosis were randomly divided into experimental group （moist burn ointment, modified circumcision group） and control group （disposable circumcision and stapler circumcision group）. 50 cases in each group. Comparison and analysis of the two groups in the operation time, the healing time of the incision, the incidence of postoperative edema, postoperative appearance of the penis and the satisfaction rate of patients, and so on. A retrospective study and analysis were carried out. Results The operation time of experimental group remains basically the same as control group, but postoperative edema frequency in the experimental group which was 4%（2/50） were superior to those in the control group which was 38%（19/50）. Postoperative wound healing time, postoperativepenile appearance and satisfaction rate in the experimental group were all signifcantly lower than those in the control group （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Improved circumcision by using MEBO is relatively simpler and improved circumcision with lower edema frequency, shorter wound healing time and higher satisfaction rate.
出处
《中国卫生标准管理》
2018年第2期115-117,共3页
China Health Standard Management
基金
福建中医药大学校管课题资助(XB2013019)
关键词
湿润烧伤膏
包皮环切术
疗效观察
一次性包皮环切吻合器
moist exposed burn ointment
circumcision
observation of curative effect
disposable circumcision anastomat
