首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The Indian Journal of Surgery >Elliptical Excision with Midline Primary Closure Versus Rhomboid Excision with Limberg Flap Reconstruction in Sacrococcygeal Pilonidal Disease: A Prospective Randomized Study
【2h】

Elliptical Excision with Midline Primary Closure Versus Rhomboid Excision with Limberg Flap Reconstruction in Sacrococcygeal Pilonidal Disease: A Prospective Randomized Study

机译:line行中段闭合的椭圆形切除与菱形皮瓣重建的菱形切除在Sa球菌性肺炎中的前瞻性随机研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

To compare elliptical excision with primary midline closure and rhomboid excision with limberg flap reconstruction techniques for the sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus. This prospective randomized study of 80 patients of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus was performed in SKIMS medical college from 2004 to 2007. After assigning patients randomly to either of the surgical groups, group A patients (40/80) were operated by using rhomboid excision with limberg flap reconstruction whereas group B patients (40/80) were operated by using elliptical excision with primary midline closure. Data was compiled in terms of operative period required, immediate post operative complications, post operative pain (VAS scores), work-off period, hospital stay and recurrences over a follow up of 3 years for the two study groups. Data thereby collected was analyzed by using Microsoft excel. The parameters in which the two techniques were found to differ significantly were work-off period, immediate post operative complications profiles and recurrence rates. Rhomboid excision with limberg flap reconstruction technique surely outscores elliptical excision with primary midline closure in certain important parameters. While facing a patient with uncomplicated sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus, instead of, which procedure for the patient? Surgeons should pose the question why not rhomboid excision with limberg flaps reconstruction?
机译:为了比较椭圆形切除与初级中线闭合和菱形切除与limberg皮瓣重建技术治疗co球菌的绒毛窦。这项前瞻性随机研究于2004年至2007年在SKIMS医学院对80例co球菌性绒毛窦患者进行了研究。在将患者随机分配到任一手术组后,A组(40/80)采用菱形切除术和limberg皮瓣进行手术。重建术,而B组(40/80)患者采用椭圆形切除术并行中线闭合术。根据两个研究组在3年的随访中所需的手术时间,术后即刻并发症,术后疼痛(VAS评分),工作时间,住院时间和复发情况对数据进行了汇编。使用Microsoft Excel分析由此收集的数据。发现这两种技术有显着差异的参数是休整期,术后即刻并发症情况和复发率。在某些重要参数上,采用limberg皮瓣重建技术的菱形切除术肯定优于采用中线闭合的椭圆形切除术。当面对一个简单的sa尾静脉绒毛窦患者时,该患者应该使用哪种手术?外科医生应该提出一个问题,为什么不使用菱形皮瓣重建菱形切除?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号