Analysis Of The Clinical Effect Of Central Wedge Resection And Peripheral Arc Resection In The Treatment Of Labia Minora Hypertrophy

Objectives:This article compares the clinical effects of central wedge resection of labia minora and peripheral arc resection in the treatment of labia minora hypertrophy,and evaluates the difference in curative effect between the two procedures in the treatment of grade Ⅲ to grade Ⅳ labia minora.This research provides a more valuable method for the clinical treatment of labia minora hypertrophy.Methods:A total of 40 female patients with grade III to grade IV labia minora hypertrophy admitted to our hospital from January 2019 to December 2020 were randomly divided into two groups,A and B,with 20 people in each group.There was no significant difference in gender,age,and the length of the labia minora between the groups(P>0.05).In group A,central wedge resection of labia minora was performed,and in group B,peripheral arc resection of labia minora was performed.The operation is performed by the same experienced and skilled doctor.By evaluating patients’ GAS scale scores before surgery,3 months after surgery,and 6 months after surgery,VAS scores at 1 day after surgery,patient satisfaction at 6 months after surgery,first-stage incision healing at 7 days after surgery,and occurrence of surgical complications,we analyze the results based on the situation.SPSS 23.0 was used for statistical analysis.The basic description of the categorical variable data was represented by examples,rates,and composition ratios.The hypothesis test count data used chi-square test,the hypothesis test measurement data used the rank sum test,and the normal distribution measurement data used the mean ±standard deviation.Indicates that the paired sample t test is used for the two groups of normally distributed measurement data,the two independent sample t test is used for the normal distribution measurement data between the two groups,the one-way analysis of variance is used for the comparison of the normal distribution measurement data between the two groups,and the pairwise comparison is used LSD-t test,P<0.05 indicates that the difference is statistically significant.Results:Through postoperative follow-up,the GAS scores of the central wedge resection group and the peripheral arc resection group were significantly reduced before surgery,3 months after surgery,and 6 months after surgery,suggesting that both surgical methods are effective in treating labia minora hypertrophy.lt has obvious curative effect.The central wedge resection group is significantly better than the peripheral arc resection group in terms of postoperative pain,patient satisfaction,and first-stage healing of the postoperative incision.Surgery-related complications occurred in both surgical procedures.The postoperative complication rate in the central wedge resection group was significantly lower than that in the peripheral arc resection group(P<0.05).The surgery-related complications had a good outcome after active treatment.1.GAS scale score.The GAS scale scores(mean ± standard deviation)of patients in the central wedge resection group before operation,3 months after operation,and 6 months after operation were 12.65±5.25,9.55±4.22,3.60±3.24,respectively;The GAS scale scores(mean±standard deviation)of patients in the peripheral arc resection group before operation,3 months after operation,and 6 months after operation were 11.15±4.56,8.00±4.08,and 6.45±3.66,respectively.Two paired sample t-tests were used to compare the differences within the groups.The differences between the central wedge resection group and the peripheral arc resection group before operation,3 months after operation,and 6 months after operation were statistically significant(P<0.05).And further two independent sample t test,one-way analysis of variance,and LSD-t test were used to compare the differences between the central wedge resection group and the peripheral arc resection group before operation,3 months after operation,and 6 months after operation.There was no statistically significant difference before operation and 3 months after operation(P>0.05),and the difference was statistically significant at 6 months after operation(P<0.05).2.VAS score at 1 day after operation.The two groups of patients underwent visual analogue pain scale(Visual Analogue Scale,VAS)assessment on the first postoperative day.The data results were shown by the rank sum test:the average rank of the central wedge resection group was 53.87,and the peripheral arc resection group was 91.80,P<0.05,so the difference between the two groups is statistically significant.3.Patient satisfaction in 6 months after operation.As the central wedge resection group,no one was very dissatisfied,1 was a little dissatisfied,6 were satisfied,4 were relatively satisfied,and 9 were very satisfied,the satisfaction rate was 95%.About the peripheral arc resection group,1 was very dissatisfied,6 were a little dissatisfied,2 were satisfied,5 were relatively satisfied,and 6 were very satisfied,the satisfaction rate was 65%.The grade data was tested by chi-square test,and the satisfaction of the central wedge resection group and the peripheral arc resection group at 6 months after the op eration was statistically significant(P<0.05).4.First-stage incision healing at 7 days after surgery.The two groups of patients were removed for 7 days to review the healing of the incision.1 patient with central wedge resection did not heal at first-stage,19 patients healed at first-stage,and the healing rate was 95%;8 patients with peripheral arc resection did not heal at first-stage,12 patients were healed,with a healing rate of 60%.After chi-square test,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).5.Postoperative complications.Postoperative complications occurred in both groups.One patient in the wedge resection group had incision dehiscence,the complication rate was 5%,and the incision healed well after the second surgical treatment;Three patients in the arc resection group had incision dehiscence.Incision infection occurred in 3 patients,local hematoma occurred in 1 patient,and the complication rate was 35%.Seven people had good outcomes after active treatment for complications after the operation.After chi-square test,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusions:Central wedge resection and peripheral arc resection have obvious curative effects in the treatment of grade Ⅲ to grade Ⅳ labia minora hypertrophy.The central wedge resection group was significantly better than the peripheral arc resection group in terms of satisfaction with postoperative genital appearance,postoperative pain,long-term postoperative efficacy,and surgery-related complications.