| 丰锦春,阿孜古丽·阿不都热合曼,李宇翔,赵倩,迪力夏提·金斯汗,李丹,李双健,吴涛.腔镜辅助下不同手术方式治疗男性乳房发育症的效果[J].中国医药导报,2024,21(6):119-122 |
二维码（扫一下试试看！） |
| 腔镜辅助下不同手术方式治疗男性乳房发育症的效果 |
| Effect study of laparoscopic treatment for gynecomastia in different ways |
| 收稿日期： 修订日期：2023-06-08 |
| DOI：10.20047/j.issn1673-7210.2024.06.28 |
| 关键词: 男性乳房发育 乳房切除术 皮下 乳腔镜 微创手术 |
| Key Words: |
| 基金项目:新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金资助项目（2018D 01C264） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 633 |
| 全文下载次数: 414 |
| 摘要:目的 探讨腔镜辅助下不同手术方式治疗男性乳房发育症（GYN）的效果。 方法 回顾性分析2017年6月至2022年11月新疆医科大学附属肿瘤医院腔镜手术治疗男性乳房发育症患者的资料共87例，按照手术方式将其分为三孔组（27例）、单孔组（32例）、单孔非溶脂组（28例）。比较三组手术时长、拔除引流管时间、并发症。术前、术后1个月评价三组术后美观度。 结果 三孔组手术时间短于单孔组、单孔非溶脂组，单孔组手术时间短于单孔非溶脂组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。三组拔引流管时间比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。三组并发症总发生率比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。乳房对称度、乳头形态、乳晕形态、胸廓平整度组间比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；单孔组、单孔非溶脂组手术瘢痕得分高于三孔组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.01）；单孔组与单孔非溶脂组手术瘢痕得分比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；单孔组及单孔非溶脂组整体外观得分高于三孔组（P＜0.05），单孔非溶脂组整体外观得分高于单孔组（P＜0.05）。 结论 三孔法具有操作便捷、手术效率高的优势；单孔法，具有切口隐蔽、美观度好的优势；针对体型偏胖、皮下脂肪较厚的患者非溶脂手术更加合适。 |
| Abstract:Objective To investigate the result of different laparoscopic operative approach in the treatment of gynecomastia(GYN). Methods A total of 87 cases of gynecomastia undergoing endoscopic surgery in the Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Xinjiang Medical University from June 2017 to November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into three-well group (27 cases), single-well group (32 cases) and single-well non-soluble group (28 cases) according to the surgical method. The operation time, drainage tube removal time, and complications of the three groups were compared. Postoperative aesthetics of the three groups were evaluated before and after one month of operation. Results The operative time of the three-well group was shorter than that of the single-well group and the single-well non-soluble group, and the operative time of the single-well group was shorter than that of the single-well non-soluble group, the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05). There was no significant difference in drainage tube extraction time among the three groups (P＞0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of total complications among the three groups (P＞0.05). There were no significant differences in breast symmetry, nipple shape, areola shape, and thoracic flatness among the three groups (P＞0.05). The surgical scar score in the single-well group and the single-well non-soluble group was higher than that in the three-well group, with statistical significance (P＜0.01). There was no significant difference in scar scores between the single-well group and the single-well non-soluble fat group (P＞0.05). The overall appearance score of the single-well group and the single-well non- soluble group was higher than that of the three-well group (P＜0.05), and the overall appearance score of the single- well non-soluble group was higher than that of the single-well group (P＜0.05). Conclusion Three well method has the advantages of convenient operation and high efficiency. Single-well approach has advantages of concealed incision and good aesthetics. Non-soluble approach is more suitable for patients with overweight body type and thick subcutaneous fat. |
| 查看全文 HTML 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|
