ultraprom疝修补系统在腹股沟疝修补中的应用评价

Wataru Izumo, K. Furukawa, Masakazu Yamamoto
{"title":"ultraprom疝修补系统在腹股沟疝修补中的应用评价","authors":"Wataru Izumo, K. Furukawa, Masakazu Yamamoto","doi":"10.4030/JJCS.37.1075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Purpose. The efficacy of ULTRAPRO HERNIA SYSTEM (UHS) technique was evaluated by comparison with standard Prolene hernia system (PHS) technique and the direct Kugel patch (DKP) technique. Methods. Forty-one patients with inguinal hernias treated by using UHS technique. They were compared with 84 patients treated with PHS technique and 116 patients treated by the DKP technique. These 3 groups were compared with respect to postoperative wound pain, wound swelling, and seroma formation. Results. The incidence of wound pain at the first outpatient visit after discharge was 7.3%, 17.9%, and 13.8%, in the UHS, PHS, and DKP groups, respectively. It was lower in the UHS group. The incidence of wound swelling was 4.9%, 11.9%, and 15.5%, respectively. The incidence of seroma was 2.4%, 9.5%, and 9.5% respectively. Both of these postoperative complications showed also lower incidence in the UHS group. Conclusion. Although we found that postoperative pain, wound swelling, and seroma tended to be less frequent in the UHS group than in the PHS and DKP groups, it did not show significant superiority in this study.","PeriodicalId":286696,"journal":{"name":"Nihon Gekakei Rengo Gakkaishi (journal of Japanese College of Surgeons)","volume":"149 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the ULTRAPROTM HERNIA SYSTEM for Inguinal Hernia Repair\",\"authors\":\"Wataru Izumo, K. Furukawa, Masakazu Yamamoto\",\"doi\":\"10.4030/JJCS.37.1075\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Purpose. The efficacy of ULTRAPRO HERNIA SYSTEM (UHS) technique was evaluated by comparison with standard Prolene hernia system (PHS) technique and the direct Kugel patch (DKP) technique. Methods. Forty-one patients with inguinal hernias treated by using UHS technique. They were compared with 84 patients treated with PHS technique and 116 patients treated by the DKP technique. These 3 groups were compared with respect to postoperative wound pain, wound swelling, and seroma formation. Results. The incidence of wound pain at the first outpatient visit after discharge was 7.3%, 17.9%, and 13.8%, in the UHS, PHS, and DKP groups, respectively. It was lower in the UHS group. The incidence of wound swelling was 4.9%, 11.9%, and 15.5%, respectively. The incidence of seroma was 2.4%, 9.5%, and 9.5% respectively. Both of these postoperative complications showed also lower incidence in the UHS group. Conclusion. Although we found that postoperative pain, wound swelling, and seroma tended to be less frequent in the UHS group than in the PHS and DKP groups, it did not show significant superiority in this study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":286696,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nihon Gekakei Rengo Gakkaishi (journal of Japanese College of Surgeons)\",\"volume\":\"149 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nihon Gekakei Rengo Gakkaishi (journal of Japanese College of Surgeons)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4030/JJCS.37.1075\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nihon Gekakei Rengo Gakkaishi (journal of Japanese College of Surgeons)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4030/JJCS.37.1075","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

抽象的目的。通过与标准Prolene疝系统(PHS)技术和直接Kugel贴片(DKP)技术的比较,评价ULTRAPRO HERNIA SYSTEM (UHS)技术的疗效。方法。UHS技术治疗腹股沟疝41例。并与84例PHS技术治疗的患者和116例DKP技术治疗的患者进行比较。比较三组患者术后创面疼痛、创面肿胀、血肿形成情况。结果。UHS组、PHS组和DKP组出院后首次门诊伤口疼痛发生率分别为7.3%、17.9%和13.8%。在UHS组则更低。创面肿胀发生率分别为4.9%、11.9%和15.5%。血清肿的发生率分别为2.4%、9.5%和9.5%。这两种术后并发症在UHS组的发生率也较低。结论。虽然我们发现UHS组的术后疼痛、伤口肿胀和血肿发生率往往低于PHS和DKP组,但在本研究中并未显示出明显的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of the ULTRAPROTM HERNIA SYSTEM for Inguinal Hernia Repair
Abstract Purpose. The efficacy of ULTRAPRO HERNIA SYSTEM (UHS) technique was evaluated by comparison with standard Prolene hernia system (PHS) technique and the direct Kugel patch (DKP) technique. Methods. Forty-one patients with inguinal hernias treated by using UHS technique. They were compared with 84 patients treated with PHS technique and 116 patients treated by the DKP technique. These 3 groups were compared with respect to postoperative wound pain, wound swelling, and seroma formation. Results. The incidence of wound pain at the first outpatient visit after discharge was 7.3%, 17.9%, and 13.8%, in the UHS, PHS, and DKP groups, respectively. It was lower in the UHS group. The incidence of wound swelling was 4.9%, 11.9%, and 15.5%, respectively. The incidence of seroma was 2.4%, 9.5%, and 9.5% respectively. Both of these postoperative complications showed also lower incidence in the UHS group. Conclusion. Although we found that postoperative pain, wound swelling, and seroma tended to be less frequent in the UHS group than in the PHS and DKP groups, it did not show significant superiority in this study.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信