• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

血管封闭系统与传统系统的比较。

Comparison of vessel sealing systems with conventional.

作者信息

Peker Kemal, Inal Abdullah, Güllü Huriye, Gül Düriye, Sahin Murat, Ozcan Ayca Dumanli, Kılıç Kemal

机构信息

Erzincan University Department of General Surgery, Erzincan, Turkey.

Erzincan University Department of Anesthesiology & Reanimation, Erzincan, Turkey.

出版信息

Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2013 Jun;15(6):488-96. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.10180. Epub 2013 Jun 5.

DOI:10.5812/ircmj.10180
PMID:24349747
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3840836/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhoids are cushions of submucosal vascular tissue located in the anal canal starting just distal to the dentate line. Haemorrhoidal disease is a common anorectal disorder which has symptoms of bleeding, prolapse, pain, thrombosis, mucus discharge, and pruritus. Haemorrhoidectomy is one of most frequently performed anorectal operation worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the LigaSure tissue sealing device, Harmonic Scalpel and conventional MM open haemorrhoidectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-nine patients with newly diagnosed symptomatic grade three or grade four haemorrhoidal disease, from July 2011 to December 2011 were recruited for the study. Patients were prospectively randomized to LigaSure, Harmonic Scalpel and conventional haemorrhoidectomy. Patients were evaluated on the basis of the mean operative time, postoperative pain, day of discharge, early and late complications.

RESULTS

Each group has twenty-three patients. Ten (14.5 %) were female and fifty-nine (85.5 %) were male. Mean age were 44.5 ± 10.8 for LigaSure group, 39.5±14.4 for Harmonic Scalpel group and 39.8 ± 13.6 for conventional haemorrhoidectomy group. Mean operative time was 12.6 ± 2.9 for LigaSure group, 12.6 ± 2.5 for Harmonic Scalpel group and 22.3 ± 4.5 for conventional haemorrhoidectomy group. Postoperative pain and required analgesic dose were significantly lower for conventional haemorrhoidectomy. Wound healing was also more rapid in conventional haemorrhoidectomy than both LigaSure and Harmonic Scalpel.

CONCLUSIONS

Lateral heat dissipation of energy based cautery such as Harmonel Scalpel and LigaSure is considerably high when compared with conventional methods. More thermal damage which is generated on tissue seems to be the reason for increased degree of postoperative pain and delay in wound healing.

摘要

背景

痔疮是位于肛管黏膜下血管组织的垫,起于齿状线远侧。痔病是一种常见的肛肠疾病,有出血、脱垂、疼痛、血栓形成、黏液排出和瘙痒等症状。痔切除术是全球最常施行的肛肠手术之一。

目的

本研究的目的是比较LigaSure组织封闭装置、超声刀和传统Milligan-Morgan开放式痔切除术的有效性。

材料与方法

2011年7月至2011年12月,69例新诊断的有症状的Ⅲ度或Ⅳ度痔病患者被纳入本研究。患者被前瞻性随机分为LigaSure组、超声刀组和传统痔切除术组。根据平均手术时间、术后疼痛、出院日期、早期和晚期并发症对患者进行评估。

结果

每组有23例患者。10例(14.5%)为女性,59例(85.5%)为男性。LigaSure组平均年龄为44.5±10.8岁,超声刀组为39.5±14.4岁,传统痔切除术组为39.8±13.6岁。LigaSure组平均手术时间为12.6±2.9分钟,超声刀组为12.6±2.5分钟,传统痔切除术组为22.3±4.5分钟。传统痔切除术的术后疼痛和所需镇痛剂量明显更低。传统痔切除术的伤口愈合也比LigaSure和超声刀都更快。

结论

与传统方法相比,诸如超声刀和LigaSure等基于能量侧向散热的电灼术热量散失相当高。组织上产生的更多热损伤似乎是术后疼痛程度增加和伤口愈合延迟的原因。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3767/3840836/1f9314919890/ircmj-15-488-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3767/3840836/2ecd92b812a2/ircmj-15-488-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3767/3840836/1f9314919890/ircmj-15-488-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3767/3840836/2ecd92b812a2/ircmj-15-488-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3767/3840836/1f9314919890/ircmj-15-488-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of vessel sealing systems with conventional.血管封闭系统与传统系统的比较。
Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2013 Jun;15(6):488-96. doi: 10.5812/ircmj.10180. Epub 2013 Jun 5.
2
Ligasure, Harmonic Scalpel versus conventional diathermy in excisional haemorrhoidectomy: a randomized controlled trial.结扎速血管闭合系统、超声刀与传统电刀用于痔切除术的比较:一项随机对照试验
ANZ J Surg. 2017 Apr;87(4):252-256. doi: 10.1111/ans.12838. Epub 2014 Sep 11.
3
Haemorrhoidectomy with Ligasure vs conventional excisional techniques: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.吻合器痔切除术与传统切除术治疗痔的随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Colorectal Dis. 2010 Feb;12(2):85-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01807.x. Epub 2009 Feb 7.
4
Randomized clinical trial comparing LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy with open diathermy haemorrhoidectomy.比较LigaSure痔切除术与开放性透热疗法痔切除术的随机临床试验。
Tech Coloproctol. 2008 Jun;12(2):93-7. doi: 10.1007/s10151-008-0405-y. Epub 2008 Jun 10.
5
Modified ultrasound scalpel haemorrhoidectomy versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy for mixed haemorrhoids: a study protocol for a single-blind randomised controlled trial.改良超声刀痔切除术与传统痔切除术治疗混合痔的比较:一项单盲随机对照试验研究方案。
Trials. 2023 Feb 24;24(1):140. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07175-6.
6
Harmonic scalpel compared with conventional excisional haemorrhoidectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.谐波手术刀与传统切除痔切除术的比较:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Tech Coloproctol. 2014 Nov;18(11):1009-16. doi: 10.1007/s10151-014-1169-1. Epub 2014 Jun 13.
7
LigaSure Haemorrhoidectomy versus Conventional Diathermy for IV-Degree Haemorrhoids: Is It the Treatment of Choice? A Randomized, Clinical Trial.LigaSure痔切除术与传统透热疗法治疗IV度痔疮:它是首选治疗方法吗?一项随机临床试验。
ISRN Gastroenterol. 2011;2011:467258. doi: 10.5402/2011/467258. Epub 2010 Nov 21.
8
Randomised trial comparing LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy with the diathermy dissection operation.比较LigaSure痔切除术与电刀切除术的随机试验。
Tech Coloproctol. 2002 Dec;6(3):171-5. doi: 10.1007/s101510200038.
9
[Ligasure haemorrhoidectomy. Personal experience].[结扎速痔切除术。个人经验]
Ann Ital Chir. 2009 May-Jun;80(3):199-204.
10
Pain after conventional versus Ligasure haemorrhoidectomy. A meta-analysis.传统手术与 Ligasure 痔切除术治疗痔疮后疼痛的比较:一项荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2010;8(4):269-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.04.001. Epub 2010 Apr 11.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of different surgical procedures for patients with hemorrhoids: a network meta-analysis.不同手术方式治疗痔疮患者的疗效和安全性比较:网状 Meta 分析。
Tech Coloproctol. 2023 Oct;27(10):799-811. doi: 10.1007/s10151-023-02855-6. Epub 2023 Aug 27.
2
An umbrella review of the surgical performance of Harmonic ultrasonic devices and impact on patient outcomes.Harmonic 超声设备手术性能的伞式评价及其对患者结局的影响。
BMC Surg. 2023 Jun 29;23(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s12893-023-02057-9.
3
Efficacy and safety of LigaSure™ small jaw instrument in thyroidectomy: a 1-year prospective observational study.

本文引用的文献

1
LigaSure Haemorrhoidectomy versus Conventional Diathermy for IV-Degree Haemorrhoids: Is It the Treatment of Choice? A Randomized, Clinical Trial.LigaSure痔切除术与传统透热疗法治疗IV度痔疮:它是首选治疗方法吗?一项随机临床试验。
ISRN Gastroenterol. 2011;2011:467258. doi: 10.5402/2011/467258. Epub 2010 Nov 21.
2
The prevalence of hemorrhoids in adults.成年人中痔疮的患病率。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012 Feb;27(2):215-20. doi: 10.1007/s00384-011-1316-3. Epub 2011 Sep 20.
3
How we can improve patients' comfort after Milligan-Morgan open haemorrhoidectomy.
LigaSure™ 小颌器械在甲状腺切除术中的疗效与安全性:一项为期1年的前瞻性观察研究。
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018 May;275(5):1257-1263. doi: 10.1007/s00405-018-4912-9. Epub 2018 Mar 13.
4
Comparison of the reliability and efficacy of LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy and a conventional Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy in the surgical treatment of grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoids.LigaSure痔切除术与传统Milligan-Morgan痔切除术在3、4度痔疮手术治疗中的可靠性和疗效比较。
Turk J Surg. 2017 Dec 1;33(4):233-236. doi: 10.5152/turkjsurg.2017.3493. eCollection 2017.
如何提高 Milligan-Morgan 开放式痔切除术患者术后舒适度。
World J Gastroenterol. 2011 Mar 21;17(11):1448-56. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i11.1448.
4
Pain after conventional versus Ligasure haemorrhoidectomy. A meta-analysis.传统手术与 Ligasure 痔切除术治疗痔疮后疼痛的比较:一项荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2010;8(4):269-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.04.001. Epub 2010 Apr 11.
5
Updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing conventional excisional haemorrhoidectomy with LigaSure for haemorrhoids.比较传统痔切除术与LigaSure治疗痔疮的随机对照试验的更新荟萃分析。
Tech Coloproctol. 2008 Sep;12(3):229-39. doi: 10.1007/s10151-008-0426-6. Epub 2008 Aug 5.
6
Randomized clinical trial comparing LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy with open diathermy haemorrhoidectomy.比较LigaSure痔切除术与开放性透热疗法痔切除术的随机临床试验。
Tech Coloproctol. 2008 Jun;12(2):93-7. doi: 10.1007/s10151-008-0405-y. Epub 2008 Jun 10.
7
Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes of randomized controlled trials of LigaSure vs conventional hemorrhoidectomy.LigaSure与传统痔切除术随机对照试验短期结果的荟萃分析。
Arch Surg. 2007 Dec;142(12):1209-18; discussion 1218. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.142.12.1209.
8
Randomized clinical trial of LigaSure and conventional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy.LigaSure与传统电凝痔切除术的随机临床试验。
Br J Surg. 2007 Aug;94(8):937-42. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5904.
9
Early results of the treatment of internal hemorrhoid disease by infrared coagulation and elastic banding: a prospective randomized cross-over trial.红外线凝固术和橡皮圈套扎术治疗内痔的早期结果:一项前瞻性随机交叉试验
Tech Coloproctol. 2006 Dec;10(4):312-7. doi: 10.1007/s10151-006-0299-5. Epub 2006 Nov 27.
10
Stapled versus conventional surgery for hemorrhoids.吻合器痔上黏膜环切术与传统手术治疗痔疮的对比
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Oct 18;2006(4):CD005393. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005393.pub2.