食管癌切除术两种术式临床疗效比较  

Comparison of clinical efficacy between video-assisted mini-thoracotomy and routine open thoracotomy in treatment for carcinoma of esophagus

作　　者：郑春鹏[1] 傅俊惠[1] 吴智勇[1] 郑海波[1] 

机构地区：[1]汕头市中心医院中山大学附属汕头医院肿瘤外科,广东省汕头515031

出　　处：《中国基层医药》2009年第8期1418-1419,共2页Chinese Journal of Primary Medicine and Pharmacy

摘　　要：目的比较胸腔镜辅助下小切口食管癌切除术与传统开胸食管癌切除术的临床疗效。方法分别观察并比较施行胸腔镜辅助下小切口食管癌切除术24例患者（观察组）及同期施行传统开胸食管癌切除术26例患者（对照组）的围术期情况。结果与对照组比较，观察组胸部手术时间缩短[（40．0±3．3）min、（70．3±3．2）min，P〈0．05]，胸部失血量及术后引流量均减少[（108．1±15．2）ml、（200．1±11．3）ml，（380．8±45．4）ml、（780．1±52．2）ml，P〈0．05]；两组并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（4．2％、19．2％，P〉0．05）。结论胸腔镜辅助下小切口食管癌切除术安全可行，与常规开胸术式相比具有创伤小、出血少、手术及住院时间短等优越性，值得推广。Objective To evaluate the advantage of videoassisted mini thoracotomy for patients with esophageal cancer compared with routine open thoracotomy. Methods Perioperative clinical results were compared between 24 cases received VAMT（test group） and 26 cases underwent routine open thoracotomy（ control group） during the same period. All the cancer stages were T2-3N0-1M0. Results This study showed that VAMT was a minimally invasive surgery with shorter operation time （40.0 ± 3.3 ） rain vs. （ 70. 3 ± 3.2） min, P 〈 0. 05 ） and had less bleeding volume both during and after operation compared to the control group （108. 1 ± 15.2）ml vs. （200. 1 ±11.3 ）ml, （ 380. 8 ± 45.4） ml vs. （ 780. 1 ± 52. 2） ml, P 〈 0.05 ）. No significant differences were observed in the two groups with respect to complication occurrence rate （4. 2% vs. 19. 2%, P 〉 0. 05 ）. Conclusion It is suggested that VAMT is safe, reliable and less invasive in the treatment of esophagus carcinoma.

关 键 词：食管肿瘤 食管切除术 胸腔镜 

分 类 号：R735[医药卫生—肿瘤]