肛周脓肿置管负压引流术与切开引流术后形成肛瘘几率的对比研究.docVIP

精品论文 参考文献 肛周脓肿置管负压引流术与切开引流术后形成肛瘘几率的对比研究 卢家玉 姚健 王顺和 刘纪锋 王玉 穆云 牛苏剑 　　（四川省泸州市人民医院 四川 泸州 646000） 　　【摘要】目的：探讨肛周脓肿置管冲洗负压引流术与肛周脓肿切开引流术两种手术方式术后形成肛瘘的几率。方法：将80例肛周脓肿随机分为置管冲洗负压引流组（治疗组）和切开引流组（对照组）。对两种不同手术方式术后病例追踪随访6个月，并作统计学分析。结果：术后半年内治疗组40例中形成肛瘘者1例，占2.5%，对照组40例中形成肛瘘者7例，占17.5%，P＜0.05。结论： 肛周脓肿置管冲洗负压引流术式与切开引流术式相比较，前者可显著降低术后形成肛瘘的几率。 　　【关键词】 置管负压引流；切开引流；肛瘘发生率；肛周脓肿 　　【中图分类号】R615 【文献标识码】A 【文章编号】2095-1752（2015）28-0025-02 　　Perianal abscess drainage tube negative pressure and operative incision drainage of the comparison of the risk formation of anal fistula 　　Lu Jiayu, Yao Jian, Wang Shunhe，Liu Jifeng,Wang Yu, Mu Yun, Niu Sujian．The Peoplersquo;s Hospital of Luzhou City.Sichuan Province, Luzhou 646000, China 　　【Abstract】 Objective Explore the risk of perianal abscess postoperative anal fistula formed by the lavage perianal abscess negative pressure drainage and perianal abscess incision drainage. Methods 80 cases of lavage perianal abscess were randomly divided into the negative pressure drainage group (treatment group) and incision drainage group (control group). For two different track cases were followed up for 6 months after operation, and statistical analysis. Results Postoperative half year ,1 cases formed of anal fisrula in the treatment group 40 cases, which accounted for 2.5%；7 cases formed of anal fistula in the control group40 cases，which accounted for 17.5%, P lt; 0.05. Conclusion Lavage perianal abscess negative pressure drainage procedure compared with surgical incision drainage, the former can significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative anal fistula formed. 　　【Key words】Drainage tube negative pressure；Operative incision drainage；The risk formation of anal fistula；Perianal abscess 　　肛门直肠周围间隙发生化脓性感染而形成脓肿者称肛门直肠周围脓肿，简称肛周脓肿。一旦发生肛周脓肿，应尽早予以手术治疗。传统各种手术均行大切口切开引流以保证引流通畅，但对于急性肛周脓肿而言，相当一部分患者在一期手术后将进一步形成肛瘘，需再次手术治疗，两次肛周大切口手术无疑会对肛门直肠功能造成了一定的损伤，出现术后肛门控便功能减弱甚至形成肛门失禁。为了观察本术式术后形成肛瘘的几率，并与切开引流术后肛瘘发生率对比，我们系统观察跟踪随访80例，现将有关资料报告如下。[1]