检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:晁志涛[1] 彭彦辉[2] 刘常利[1] 凌全福[1] 洪浩[1] 高贺军[1]
机构地区:[1]河北大学附属石油物探中心医院腹腔镜中心,河北徐水072555 [2]河北省人民医院普外科,河北石家庄050051
出 处:《河北医科大学学报》2009年第4期342-344,共3页Journal of Hebei Medical University
基 金:2006年河北省医学科学研究重点青年基金项目(06151)
摘 要:目的比较微创内引流一期缝合和常规开腹治疗肝外胆管结石对胃肠功能的影响。方法将94例肝外胆管结石患者随机分为微创治疗组和开腹手术组,比较2组术后肠鸣音恢复时间、肛门排气、排便时间等情况。结果所有病例均无残余结石及严重并发症。微创治疗组与开腹手术组比较,术后肠鸣音恢复时间、第1次肛门排气及排便时间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论微创内引流一期缝合使胃肠动力恢复较快。Objective To compare the influence of laparoscopic eholedochotomy with endobiliary stent and primary closure of common bile duct and traditional open surgery on gastrointestinal function in the treatment of extrahepatic biliary duct stone. Methods Ninty four cases with extrahepatic biliary duct stone were randomly divided into 2 groups (mini-invasive operation group 48 cases, laparotomy group 46 cases), and then the peristaltic sound recovery timing (PSRT),the anorectum exhaust timing (AET) and the anorectum defecate timing (ADT) after operation in both approaches were compared. Results Neither residual stones were left,nor serious complication observed. The PSRT, the AET and ADT in mini-invasive group were much shorter than laparotomy group ( P ~0.05). Conclusion As compared with open common bile duct exploration,laparoscopic choledochotomy with endobiliary stent and primary closure of the common bile duct has the advantages of less influence on gastrointestinal function, and the gastrointestinal motility recovered faster.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.80