食管癌术后病人两种营养支持治疗的比较  

Comparison of two nutrition support therapy in postoperative patients with esophageal cancer

作　　者：管宏俊[1] 陈云琦[1] 孙长鹏[1] 周金才[1] 陈光成[1] 

机构地区：[1]建湖县人民医院胸外科,江苏建湖224700

出　　处：《肠外与肠内营养》2012年第1期24-25,28,共3页Parenteral & Enteral Nutrition

摘　　要：目的:观察食管癌术后病人两种营养支持疗法的效果。方法:将80例食管癌术后病人随机分为肠外营养(PN)组和肠内营养(EN)组,所有病人在手术前1 d和术后第8天检测血红蛋白(Hb)、血清清蛋白(ALB)、前清蛋白(PA)、转铁蛋白(TF)、体质指数(BMI)以及肛门排气时间、住院时间和营养费用等指标。结果:两组病人术后血清ALB,住院时间、BMI、Hb比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。EN组病人血清PA,TF明显高于PN组(P<0.05),术后肛门排气时间明显早于PN组(P<0.05),所用营养费用低于PN组。结论:两种营养支持治疗均可改善食管癌病人的营养状况,但EN与PN比,更具有符合生理、安全、价廉的优点。Objective： To evaluate the effect of two nutrition support therapy in postoperative patients with esophageal cancer.Methods： Eighty patients with esophageal cancer were randomly divided into parenteral nutrition（PN,n=40）group and enteral nutrition（EN,n=40）group.Blood hemoglobin（Hb）,serum albumin（ALB）,prealbumin（PA）,transferrin（TF）,body mass index of all patients were measured before operation and on postoperative day 8.Anus exhaust time,length of hospital stay and nutrition cost were also recorded.Results： There was no significant difference between the two groups on postoperative serum albumin,length of hospital stay,body mass index and blood hemoglobin（P0.05）.Prealbumin and transferrin in the EN group were significantly higher than in the PN group（P0.05）.And the time of gas passage by anus in EN group was earlier and the cost of nutrition was less than those in the PN group（P0.05）.Conclusion： The two nutrition support methods can both improve the nutritional status.But enteral nutrition is more physiological,safe,inexpensive than parenteral nutrition.

关 键 词：食管癌 肠外营养 肠内营养 

分 类 号：R735.1[医药卫生—肿瘤] R459.3[医药卫生—临床医学]