PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: To investigate the surgical outcomes and complication rates of traditional circumcision and disposable circumcision stapler in the treatment of pediatric patients with phimosis and redundant prepuce.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective analysis was conducted on pediatric patients with phimosis or preputial redundancy treated at our pediatric surgery department from January 2022 to December 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: treated with traditional circumcision (control group) and treated with a disposable circumcision stapler (experimental group). Surgical parameters (operation time, intraoperative bleeding), postoperative outcomes (postoperative pain scores, wound healing time, severe edge swelling, wound dehiscence, postoperative rebleeding, postoperative infection, aesthetic satisfaction), were compared between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 301 pediatric patients were included in our study, with 146 in the traditional group and 155 in the stapler group. The stapler group showed significantly lower values in operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative rebleeding compared to the traditional group (P < 0.05). However, the traditional group had a significant advantage in postoperative wound healing time and the occurrence of severe edge swelling (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of anesthetic drug dosage, postoperative pain level, postoperative infection rate, wound dehiscence, and aesthetic satisfaction (P > 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: In the treatment of pediatric phimosis and redundant prepuce, the advantage of traditional circumcision lies in faster postoperative recovery and less severe edge swelling. The disposable circumcision stapler excels in thorough hemostasis, easy and safe operation, suitable for primary medical use, but lags behind in postoperative recovery compared to the traditional method. Each treatment approach has its own advantages, and the choice should be based on the actual condition and circumstances of the patient. Personalized treatment decisions should be made collaboratively to achieve the best therapeutic outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective analysis was conducted on pediatric patients with phimosis or preputial redundancy treated at our pediatric surgery department from January 2022 to December 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: treated with traditional circumcision (control group) and treated with a disposable circumcision stapler (experimental group). Surgical parameters (operation time, intraoperative bleeding), postoperative outcomes (postoperative pain scores, wound healing time, severe edge swelling, wound dehiscence, postoperative rebleeding, postoperative infection, aesthetic satisfaction), were compared between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 301 pediatric patients were included in our study, with 146 in the traditional group and 155 in the stapler group. The stapler group showed significantly lower values in operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative rebleeding compared to the traditional group (P < 0.05). However, the traditional group had a significant advantage in postoperative wound healing time and the occurrence of severe edge swelling (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of anesthetic drug dosage, postoperative pain level, postoperative infection rate, wound dehiscence, and aesthetic satisfaction (P > 0.05).
UNASSIGNED: In the treatment of pediatric phimosis and redundant prepuce, the advantage of traditional circumcision lies in faster postoperative recovery and less severe edge swelling. The disposable circumcision stapler excels in thorough hemostasis, easy and safe operation, suitable for primary medical use, but lags behind in postoperative recovery compared to the traditional method. Each treatment approach has its own advantages, and the choice should be based on the actual condition and circumstances of the patient. Personalized treatment decisions should be made collaboratively to achieve the best therapeutic outcomes.
摘要：
■探讨传统包皮环切术和一次性包皮吻合器治疗小儿包茎和包皮过长的手术效果及并发症发生率。
■对2022年1月至2023年12月在我们的儿科外科治疗的包茎或包皮过长的儿科患者进行了回顾性分析。将患者分为两组：传统包皮环切术（对照组）和一次性包皮环切术吻合器（实验组）。手术参数（手术时间，术中出血），术后结果（术后疼痛评分，伤口愈合时间,严重的边缘肿胀，伤口裂开,术后再出血,术后感染,审美满意度)，对两组进行比较。
■本研究共纳入301名儿科患者，传统组中有146个，订书机组中有155个。吻合器组的手术时间值明显较低，术中出血,术后再出血与传统组比较(P<0.05)。然而,传统组在术后创面愈合时间及严重边缘肿胀发生率方面具有显著优势(P<0.05)。两组在麻醉药物用量方面无显著差异,术后疼痛程度,术后感染率,伤口裂开,和审美满意度(P>0.05)。
■在小儿包茎和包皮过长的治疗中，传统包皮环切术的优势在于术后恢复快，边缘肿胀不严重。一次性包皮环切缝合器在彻底止血方面非常出色，操作简单安全,适用于初级医疗用途，但与传统方法相比，术后恢复滞后。每种治疗方法都有自己的优点，选择应根据患者的实际情况和情况而定。个性化的治疗决策应合作进行，以达到最佳的治疗效果。
■对2022年1月至2023年12月在我们的儿科外科治疗的包茎或包皮过长的儿科患者进行了回顾性分析。将患者分为两组：传统包皮环切术（对照组）和一次性包皮环切术吻合器（实验组）。手术参数（手术时间，术中出血），术后结果（术后疼痛评分，伤口愈合时间,严重的边缘肿胀，伤口裂开,术后再出血,术后感染,审美满意度)，对两组进行比较。
■本研究共纳入301名儿科患者，传统组中有146个，订书机组中有155个。吻合器组的手术时间值明显较低，术中出血,术后再出血与传统组比较(P<0.05)。然而,传统组在术后创面愈合时间及严重边缘肿胀发生率方面具有显著优势(P<0.05)。两组在麻醉药物用量方面无显著差异,术后疼痛程度,术后感染率,伤口裂开,和审美满意度(P>0.05)。
■在小儿包茎和包皮过长的治疗中，传统包皮环切术的优势在于术后恢复快，边缘肿胀不严重。一次性包皮环切缝合器在彻底止血方面非常出色，操作简单安全,适用于初级医疗用途，但与传统方法相比，术后恢复滞后。每种治疗方法都有自己的优点，选择应根据患者的实际情况和情况而定。个性化的治疗决策应合作进行，以达到最佳的治疗效果。
