传统手术与腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌患者的临床效果分析
|
摘要
目的对比分析直肠癌患者临床治疗期间传统开腹术与腹腔镜手术的应用效果。方法选择该院于2018年1—12月期间收治的65例直肠癌患者,借助抓阄法+患者个人意愿的方式,划分为实验组(31例)、参照组(34例)。参照组患者接受传统开腹手术治疗,实验组患者接受腹腔镜手术治疗,比对两组患者的术中出血量、手术时间、肛门排气时间、肠管切除长度、淋巴清除量以及并发症发生率。结果实验组患者的术中出血量、手术时间、肛门排气时间明显优于参照组患者,数据差异有统计学意义(t=8.030、6.674、17.654,P<0.05);实验组患者的肠管切除长度、淋巴清除量与参照组患者较为接近,数据差异无统计学意义(t=1.724、0.040,P>0.05);实验组患者的并发症发生率为9.12%,参照组患者的并发症发生率为32.35%,两组数据对比分析,差异有统计学意义(χ~2=4.934,P<0.05)。结论以腹腔镜手术对直肠癌患者进行临床治疗,相对比传统开腹术而言,患者术中出血量较少,手术时间较短,有利于缩短患者的康复周期,而且安全性较好,患者出现并发症的风险性较低,应做直肠癌治疗的推荐方案。
Objective To compare the effects of traditional open surgery and laparoscopic surgery during clinical treatment of rectal cancer patients. Methods Sixty-five patients with rectal cancer admitted to our hospital from January2018 to December 2018 were divided into experimental group(31 cases) and reference group(34 cases) by means of grasping method and patient's personal wishes. Patients in the reference group underwent conventional open surgery.Patients in the experimental group underwent laparoscopic surgery. The intraoperative blood loss, operative time, anal exhaust time, length of bowel resection, lymphatic clearance, and complication rate were compared between the two groups. Results The intraoperative blood loss, operation time and anal exhaust time of the experimental group were significantly better than those of the reference group. The data were statistically significant(t=8.030, 6.674, 17.654, P<0.05); the intestinal tube of the experimental group The length of resection and lymphatic clearance were similar to those in the reference group. There was no statistically significant difference in data(t=1.724, 0.040, P>0.05). The complication rate of the experimental group was 9.12%. The complication rate was 32.35%. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(χ~2=4.934, P<0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic surgery for patients with rectal cancer is clinically treated. Compared with traditional laparotomy, the patient has less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time, which is beneficial to shorten the recovery period of patients and has better safety. Patients have a lower risk of complications and should be recommended for the treatment of rectal cancer.
Objective To compare the effects of traditional open surgery and laparoscopic surgery during clinical treatment of rectal cancer patients. Methods Sixty-five patients with rectal cancer admitted to our hospital from January2018 to December 2018 were divided into experimental group(31 cases) and reference group(34 cases) by means of grasping method and patient's personal wishes. Patients in the reference group underwent conventional open surgery.Patients in the experimental group underwent laparoscopic surgery. The intraoperative blood loss, operative time, anal exhaust time, length of bowel resection, lymphatic clearance, and complication rate were compared between the two groups. Results The intraoperative blood loss, operation time and anal exhaust time of the experimental group were significantly better than those of the reference group. The data were statistically significant(t=8.030, 6.674, 17.654, P<0.05); the intestinal tube of the experimental group The length of resection and lymphatic clearance were similar to those in the reference group. There was no statistically significant difference in data(t=1.724, 0.040, P>0.05). The complication rate of the experimental group was 9.12%. The complication rate was 32.35%. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant(χ~2=4.934, P<0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic surgery for patients with rectal cancer is clinically treated. Compared with traditional laparotomy, the patient has less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time, which is beneficial to shorten the recovery period of patients and has better safety. Patients have a lower risk of complications and should be recommended for the treatment of rectal cancer.
引文
[1]齐润海.腹腔镜直肠癌手术与传统开腹直肠癌手术的临床疗效对比分析[J].中国保健营养,2016,26(23):86.
[2]王鸿,陈伟平.腹腔镜和开腹手术治疗直肠癌伴发肝转移患者的临床疗效研究分析[J].浙江创伤外科,2016,21(3):479-480.
[3]李斌,江媛,胡玉娟.腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术在直肠癌根治术中的临床效果[J].中国医药导报,2017,14(17):88-91.
[4]王定伦.腹腔镜直肠癌手术与传统开腹直肠癌手术的临床疗效对比分析[J].中外医疗,2017,36(18):73-75.
[5]李庆文.腹腔镜与传统开腹手术治疗直肠癌的临床效果观察[J].中外医学研究,2016,14(13):114-116.
[6]方壮伟,袁波,周卫平,等.开放手术与腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的安全性及远期疗效比较[J].中国临床研究,2016,29(10):1375-1377.
[7]分析比较腹腔镜手术与开放手术治疗直肠癌的远期疗效[J].中国医药指南,2016,14(36):105.
[8]刘余虎.腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术在直肠癌根治术中的临床疗效比较[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2016,16(77):102.
[9]文拓,王定伦.腹腔镜与传统开腹手术治疗直肠癌的临床疗效分析及风险评估[J].中国社区医师,2017,33(25):58-59.
[10]赵裕新.高龄直肠癌患者行腹腔镜手术的可行性及临床效果分析[J].临床医学研究与实践,2017,2(33):75-76.
[11]韩学英,刘存伟,左志远.腹腔镜直肠癌手术与传统开腹直肠癌手术临床疗效对比分析[J].转化医学电子杂志,2017,4(9):42-43.
[12]宁丞君,杜玲玲,王瑜瑾.腹腔镜手术与新辅助化疗联合治疗直肠癌的临床效果分析[J].内蒙古医学杂志,2017,49(11):1321-1322.
[2]王鸿,陈伟平.腹腔镜和开腹手术治疗直肠癌伴发肝转移患者的临床疗效研究分析[J].浙江创伤外科,2016,21(3):479-480.
[3]李斌,江媛,胡玉娟.腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术在直肠癌根治术中的临床效果[J].中国医药导报,2017,14(17):88-91.
[4]王定伦.腹腔镜直肠癌手术与传统开腹直肠癌手术的临床疗效对比分析[J].中外医疗,2017,36(18):73-75.
[5]李庆文.腹腔镜与传统开腹手术治疗直肠癌的临床效果观察[J].中外医学研究,2016,14(13):114-116.
[6]方壮伟,袁波,周卫平,等.开放手术与腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的安全性及远期疗效比较[J].中国临床研究,2016,29(10):1375-1377.
[7]分析比较腹腔镜手术与开放手术治疗直肠癌的远期疗效[J].中国医药指南,2016,14(36):105.
[8]刘余虎.腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术在直肠癌根治术中的临床疗效比较[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2016,16(77):102.
[9]文拓,王定伦.腹腔镜与传统开腹手术治疗直肠癌的临床疗效分析及风险评估[J].中国社区医师,2017,33(25):58-59.
[10]赵裕新.高龄直肠癌患者行腹腔镜手术的可行性及临床效果分析[J].临床医学研究与实践,2017,2(33):75-76.
[11]韩学英,刘存伟,左志远.腹腔镜直肠癌手术与传统开腹直肠癌手术临床疗效对比分析[J].转化医学电子杂志,2017,4(9):42-43.
[12]宁丞君,杜玲玲,王瑜瑾.腹腔镜手术与新辅助化疗联合治疗直肠癌的临床效果分析[J].内蒙古医学杂志,2017,49(11):1321-1322.