包皮切割缝合器、商环及传统包皮环切术的临床疗效比较

目的:比较包皮切割缝合器与商环及传统包皮环切术治疗包皮过长或包茎的手术疗效及安全性。方法:将240例包皮过长或包茎患者随机分为传统包皮环切术组、商环组及包皮切割缝合器组(PCSD)。对比分析三组手术时间、出血量、术中疼痛评分、术后疼痛评分、切口愈合时间、感染、切口裂开、术后水肿、术后出血等情况。结果:在手术时间、术中疼痛评分、术后疼痛评分、切口愈合时间、感染、切口裂开、术后水肿方面,PCSD组都明显优于传统包皮环切术组及商环组(P0.05);PCSD组术中出血量明显少于传统包皮环切术组(P0.05),而与商环组比较未见明显差别;在术后出血方面,三组比较未见明显的差异。结论:PCSD可以明显缩短包皮过长或包茎的手术时间,降低术中、术后疼痛,减少术后并发症。

Comparison of the Clinical Effect of Penile Circumcision Suturing Device, Shang Ring and Conventional Circumcision

Objective:To compare the clinical effects of Penile Circumcision and Suturing Device (PCSD), Shang Ring and conventional circumcision on phimosis and phimosis.Methods:A total of 240 patients with phimosis and phimosis were randomly divided into three groups (conventional circumcision, Shang ring and PCSD). The operation duration, blood loss, intraoperative pain scores, postoperative pain scores, incision healing time, incidence of infection, incision dehiscence, postoperative edema and postoperative bleeding were compared.Results:The PCSD group was better than conventional circumcision and Shang Ring group in operation duration, intraoperative pain scores, postoperative pain scores, incision healing time, infection, incision dehiscence, postoperative edema (P<0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of PCSD group was obviously less than that of conventional circumcision group (P<0.05), but no obvious difference was observed compared with Shang Ring group. There was no obvious difference among PCSD, Shang Ring and conventional circumcision group in postoperative bleeding.Conclusion:PCSD could obviously shorten the operation time, reduce the intraoperative and postoperative pain as well as the postoperative complications.