Suppr超能文献

两种不同一次性包皮环切缝合器在成年男性中的临床疗效比较研究

A Comparative Study on the Clinical Efficacy of Two Different Disposable Circumcision Suture Devices in Adult Males.

作者信息

Shen Junwen, Shi Jihan, Gao Jianguo, Wang Ning, Tang Jianer, Yu Bin, Wang Weigao, Wang Rongjiang

机构信息

Departments of Urology, the first people's hospital of Huzhou, Zhejiang province,China.

Departments of anesthesiology, the first people's hospital of Huzhou, Zhejiang province, China.

出版信息

Urol J. 2017 Aug 29;14(5):5013-5017.

Abstract

PURPOSE

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of two different kinds of disposable circumcision suture devices in adult men.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult male patients (n = 179; mean age: 23.7 years) with redundant prepuce and/or phimosis were included in a clinical trial from July 2015 to August 2016. Patients were divided into 2 groups: group A using the Langhe disposable circumcision suture device (n = 89), and group B using the Daming disposable circumcision suture device (n = 94).

RESULTS

Intraoperative and postoperative bleeding were more serious in the group A of disposable circumcision suture device compared with the group B of disposable circumcision suture device (4.21 ± 1.31 ml) versus (2.56 ± 1.45 ml). Patients in the group B of disposable circumcision suture device had a longer swelling time (group A versus group B: 11.7 ± 0.9 days versus 14.5 ± 1.4 days), the postoperative pain score in the 7 days after surgery (group A versus group B: 2.9 ± 0.9 versus 3.8 ± 1.5), and higher postoperative infection rate (group A versus group B: 4.7% versus 13.8%), the differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

postoperative complications of the two kinds of disposable circumcision suture devices are different. We should pay attention to the risk of postoperative bleeding when the patients use the Langhe disposable circumcision suture device, while the patients who use the Langhe disposable circumcision suture device will have a longer healing time, and postoperative pain and the risk of infection cannot be ignored after the surgery.

摘要

目的

我们评估了两种不同类型的一次性包皮环切缝合器在成年男性中的安全性和有效性。

材料与方法

2015年7月至2016年8月,将患有包皮过长和/或包茎的成年男性患者(n = 179;平均年龄:23.7岁)纳入一项临床试验。患者分为2组:A组使用狼和一次性包皮环切缝合器(n = 89),B组使用大明一次性包皮环切缝合器(n = 94)。

结果

与使用大明一次性包皮环切缝合器的B组相比,使用狼和一次性包皮环切缝合器的A组术中及术后出血更严重(4.21±1.31毫升)对(2.56±1.45毫升)。使用大明一次性包皮环切缝合器的B组患者肿胀时间更长(A组对B组:11.7±0.9天对14.5±1.4天),术后7天的术后疼痛评分(A组对B组:2.9±0.9对3.8±1.5),以及术后感染率更高(A组对B组:4.7%对13.8%),差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。

结论

两种一次性包皮环切缝合器的术后并发症有所不同。患者使用狼和一次性包皮环切缝合器时应注意术后出血风险,而使用狼和一次性包皮环切缝合器的患者愈合时间更长,术后疼痛和感染风险在术后也不容忽视。

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