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
机构地区:[1]蚌埠医学院第二附属医院普通外科,安徽蚌埠233004 [2]蚌埠医学院,安徽蚌埠233000 [3]中南大学湘雅医院,湖南长沙410008
出 处:《中国内镜杂志》2011年第7期695-698,共4页China Journal of Endoscopy
摘 要:目的探讨腹腔镜低位直肠癌保肛手术的可行性、安全性、经济性及近期疗效。方法回顾性对比分析2007年12月~2010年11月开展的低位直肠癌保肛手术52例,其中腹腔镜直肠癌全系膜切除的病例28例(腹腔镜组),开腹直肠癌全系膜切除的病例24例(开腹组),对其资料及医疗成本进行比较分析。结果腹腔镜组与开腹组的一般资料差异无显著性。腹腔镜组术中出血量、手术切口长度、恢复肠道功能的时间、下床活动时间和住院时间([65±52)mL、(5.0±1.4)cm、(36±12)h、(4.2±1.1)d和(11.6±3.2)d]明显低于开腹手术组([168±63)mL、(19.1±4.5)cm、(77±18)h、(8.2±3.1)d和(18.2±4.7)d](P<0.05)。两组清扫淋巴结的数目差异无显著性,下切缘均为阴性(P>0.05)。开腹手术组术后切口感染发生机会多于腹腔镜组(P<0.05),两组吻合口瘘的发生率基本相同。总住院费用差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜低位直肠癌保肛手术创伤小,恢复快,安全可靠,能够取得与开腹手术同样的肿瘤根治性效果,且不增加总的医疗成本。[Objective] To evaluate the feasibility,safety and advantage of laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer with anal sphincter preservation.[Methods] From Dec.2007 to Nov.2010,28 patients with rectal cancer underwent anterior resection,while 24 cases were subjected to open procedure.The early outcomes as well as the medical costs of two groups were compared.[Results] The mean operative blood loss,the length of incision,the resuming time of bowel function,the time of resuming early activity and the hospital stay [(65±52) mL,(5.0±1.4) cm,(36±12) h,(4.2±1.1) d and(11.6±3.2) d] in laparoscopic group were significantly lower than that [(168±63) mL,(19.1±4.5) cm,(77±18) h,(8.2±3.1) d and(18.2±4.7) d] in open group(P 0.05).No significant differences were detected between two groups in specimen length and lymph node harvest(P 0.05).Vesical hematuria and infection in incision are more likely to take place in open group than in laparoscopic group.The rate of anastomotic leakage was almost same in two groups.The total medical cost was not significantly different between two groups.[Conclusions] Laparoscopic surgery is feasible,safe and minimally invasive technique for rectal cancer with anal sphincter preservation,which can get the same radical effect of TME compared with the traditional open procedure.The total economical burden for the patients were not significantly different between the laparoscopic and open groups.
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:216.73.216.3