胸部小切口在肺癌和食管癌根治术中的临床应用  

A clinical study of lung and esophageal cancer radical surgery with minimally invasive incision

作　　者：路东明[1] 韩开宝[1] 张传生[1] 周源[1] 孙宏志[1] 许罡[1] 张剑锋[1] 汪栋[1] 

机构地区：[1]解放军八一医院胸心外科,南京210002

出　　处：《临床肿瘤学杂志》2009年第5期429-431,共3页Chinese Clinical Oncology

摘　　要：目的:在保证与常规切口近似的疗效前提下,探讨经胸部小切口实施肺癌和食管癌根治术的临床价值。方法:收集我科2006年1月～2007年1月310例肺癌和食管癌根治术的资料进行回顾性分析,其中小切口组(改良组)143例,传统组167例,其中包括6例在术中由小切口转换为传统切口。比较两组手术时间、切口长度、术中出血、术后引流量、淋巴结清扫数目、术后上肢功能恢复时间、术后疼痛程度、术后并发症等。结果:改良组在术中出血、术后引流、术后疼痛程度、上肢功能恢复时间上明显优于传统组,在手术时间、淋巴结清扫数目、术后并发症上无明显差异。结论:以小切口实施肺癌和食管癌根治术,损伤小,术后恢复快,治疗效果与传统手术方式基本相同,但少部分病例应用受限。Objective ： To study the application of small thoracic incision for lung cancer and esophageal cancer radical surgery with comparabale to that of conventional incison. Methods：A total of 310 patients with lung cancer or esophageal cancer radical surgery during the period of from January 2006 to January 2007 were retrospective analyzed. Small incison group had 143 patients and conventional incision had 167 patients, the incision length, operation time, intra-operation bleeding and post-operation drainage volume, upper limb function recovery time, lymph node scavenge number, postoperative pain, postoperative complications of two groups were compared. Results：The operation time, lymph node scavenge number, postoperative complications of two groups have no difference obviouslyo But the incision length, intra-operation bleeding and post-operation drainage volume, upper limb function recovery time, post- operative pain of small incison groups were much better than that of conventional groups. Conclusion： Muscle-sparing thoracic small incision can achieve excellent clinical result and has such advantages as less invasiveness, reduced bleeding volume, pain and better postoperative appearance. This procedure meets the requirements of esophageal and lung cancer radical surgery, and also provides an alternative for lung cancer and esophageal cancer surgery.

关 键 词：肺肿瘤 食管肿瘤 根治术 胸部小切口 

分 类 号：R730.56[医药卫生—肿瘤] R734.2[医药卫生—临床医学]