[1]柳杰,文西年,王云海＊.经腹腹膜前与完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术的卫生经济学评价[J].中国微创外科杂志,2013,13(6):489-492.
　Liu Jie,Wen Xinian,Wang Yunhai..A Costeffectiveness Analysis of Transabdominal Preperitoneal and Total Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair[J].Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery,2013,13(6):489-492.
点击复制

经腹腹膜前与完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术的卫生经济学评价()
分享到：

《中国微创外科杂志》[ISSN:1009-6604/CN:11-4526/R]

卷:
13
期数:
2013年6期
页码:
489-492
栏目:
出版日期:
2013-06-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
A Costeffectiveness Analysis of Transabdominal Preperitoneal and Total Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
作者:
柳杰; 文西年; 王云海＊
新疆医科大学第一附属医院胃肠（肿瘤）外科，乌鲁木齐830054
Author(s):
Liu Jie; Wen Xinian;  Wang Yunhai.
Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University，Wulumuqi 830054，China
关键词:
腹腔镜; 腹股沟疝; 成本效果比; 卫生经济学
Keywords:
Laparoscope; Inguinal hernia; Cost/effectiveness（C/E）; Health economics
分类号:
R656.2+1
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的比较经腹腹膜前补片植入术(transabdominal preperitoneal, TAPP)和完全腹膜外补片植入术(totally extraperitoneal, TEP)的疗效以及卫生资源利用率。方法回顾性分析我院2010年6月~2012年6月47例行腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术（laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, LIHR）的临床资料，其中TAPP组27例（33侧），TEP组20例（29侧）。比较2组术后住院时间、并发症、复发、直接医疗成本、间接成本、成本效果比等指标。结果与TAPP组相比，TEP组麻醉费高［1061元（850~1267元）vs. 918元（730~1180元），Z=-2.153，P=0.031］，材料费用低［2897元（901~3956元）vs. 3213元（2556~9559元），Z=-2.109，P=0.035］，成本-效果比低［8932.16元vs. 9754.34元］。2组术后住院时间［（3.4±1.0） d vs. （3.2±0.8）d，t=0.736，P=0.465］、并发症发生率［0 vs. 5%（1/20），P=0.426］、复发率［3.7%（1/27） vs. 5%（1/20），P=0.675］无明显统计学差异。2组检查费用、药品费用、手术费用、床位费用、护理诊疗费用、间接成本、总成本无明显统计学差异（P＞0.05）。结论TAPP与TEP治疗成人腹股沟疝疗效相同；与TAPP相比，TEP通过减少材料费用提高卫生资源利用率。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and utilization rate of health resources of transabdominal preperitoneal and total extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. MethodsFrom June 2010 to June 2012, the clinical data of 47 cases of laparoscope inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) were analyzed retrospectively. Twenty seven cases underwent transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP group) and twenty cases underwent totally extraperitoneal (TEP group). The postoperative hospital stay, complications, recurrence rate, direct and indirect medical cost of operation, and cost/effectiveness were compared. ResultsCompared with the TAPP group, the TEP group had significantly higher cost of anesthetization ［1061 (850-1267) RMB vs. 918 (730-1180) RMB, Z=-2.153, P=0.031］, lower cost of material cost［2897(901-3956) RMB vs. 3213 (2556-9559) RMB, Z=-2.109, P=0.035］ and lower costeffectiveness ［8932.16 RMB vs. 9754.34 RMB］. There were no significant statistical differences between the two groups in postoperative hospital stay［(3.4±1.0)d vs. (3.2±0.8)d, t=0.736, P=0.465］, complication rate［0 vs. 1（5%），P=0.426］ and recurrence rate［3.7%(1/27) vs. 5%(1/20), P=0.675］. No significant difference could be found between the two groups in examination cost, medicine cost, operation cost, bed fee, indirect and total cost(P＞0.05).ConclusionTAPP and TEP have similar effect in treating adult inguinal hernia and TEP has higher costeffectiveness in material cost compared with TAPP.

参考文献/References:

[1]Fontana I, Bertocchi M, Rossi AM, et al. Late ureteral stenosis after kidney transplantation: a singlecenter experience. Transplant Proc,2010,42(4):1174-1175.
[2]中华医学会外科学分会疝和腹壁外科学组.成人腹股沟疝诊疗指南（2012年版）.中华外科杂志，2013，51（1）：4-6.
[3]张辉.腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术临床应用研究.硕士学位论文.上海:上海交通大学,2008.21-23.
[4]谢学羿,林唯栋,温顺前.经腹腹膜前腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术（TAPP）502例.中国微创外科杂志,2011,11(7):585-595.
[5]严辉弟,肖春林,王茂林.腹腔镜完全腹膜外面免钉合腹股沟疝修补术45例.中国微创外科杂志,2010,10(10):942-944.
[6]Umberto B, Paolo M, Giusto P, et al. Which is the best laparoscopic approach for inguinal hernia repair: TEP or TAPP? A systematic review of the literature with a network metaanalysis. Surg Endosc,2012,26(1):3355-3366.
[7]李健文,张云.腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术合理应用再思考.中国实用外科杂志,2012,32(6):445-447.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
＊通讯作者，Email：xjlj8561305@163.com
更新日期/Last Update: 2014-01-08