Amarin Marzouq, Al-Taher Raed, Daradka Khaled, Abu Harb Amal Ibraheem Abd Al Qader, Habashneh Rawan Abd AlMohsen Mohammad, Bustami Nadwa Basem, Hijazein Yazan, Hadadin Hiba, Al-Najjar Sondos Wa'el Sa'dat
Department of General Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
Department of Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
Arch Plast Surg. 2024 Feb 29;51(2):202-207. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1777280. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Ingrown toenail is a common condition that results in chronic pain, recurrent infections, and difficulty in performing daily activities. Our aim is to compare two surgical methods for the treatment of ingrown toenails: wedge resection with curetting versus wedge resection curetting followed by electrocauterization of the nail bed. A prospective, comparative study that included 130 patients with ingrown toenails. All patients had stage II or III disease. We divided the participants into two groups according to the type of surgery and all patients were followed up for 6 months. The outcomes measured were the incidence of postoperative bleeding and infection, recovery time, patient satisfaction, and recurrence rate 6 months after surgery. Of the 130 patients included, 59 (45.4%) underwent excision and curetting of the nail matrix (group 1) and 71 (54.6%) underwent excision, curetting, and electrocauterization of the nail matrix (group 2). The postoperative infection rates were 20.3 and 4.2% in the first and second groups, respectively ( = 0.004). Patient satisfaction was 76.3% among the first group, while 91.5% of patients in the second group were satisfied with the results of surgery. Six months postoperatively, recurrence rates were 25.4 and 4.2% in the first and second groups, respectively ( = 0.001). Wedge excision and curettage, followed by electrocauterization of the ingrown toenail is a safe treatment modality with a high success rate, that is evident by a lower recurrence rate, and greater patient satisfaction, with no effect on postoperative pain score or recovery time.
嵌甲是一种常见病症,会导致慢性疼痛、反复感染以及日常活动困难。我们的目的是比较两种治疗嵌甲的手术方法:楔形切除术加刮除术与楔形切除术加刮除术,随后对甲床进行电灼术。
一项前瞻性比较研究,纳入了130例嵌甲患者。所有患者均为II期或III期疾病。我们根据手术类型将参与者分为两组,所有患者均随访6个月。测量的结果包括术后出血和感染的发生率、恢复时间、患者满意度以及术后6个月的复发率。
在纳入的130例患者中,59例(45.4%)接受了甲母质切除和刮除术(第1组),71例(54.6%)接受了甲母质切除、刮除术及电灼术(第2组)。第一组和第二组的术后感染率分别为20.3%和4.2%(P = 0.004)。第一组患者满意度为76.3%,而第二组91.5%的患者对手术结果满意。术后6个月,第一组和第二组的复发率分别为25.4%和4.2%(P = 0.001)。
楔形切除并刮除,随后对嵌甲进行电灼术是一种安全的治疗方式,成功率高,复发率较低以及患者满意度更高证明了这一点,且对术后疼痛评分或恢复时间没有影响。