比较超声吸引刀与间断血流阻断技术的方法在肝叶切除中的应用研究  

Comparing application of cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator versus intermittent vascular for liver resection

作　　者：乔鸥[1] 胡平海[1] 金焰[1] 

机构地区：[1]昆明医学院附属昆华医院,云南昆明650032

出　　处：《中国现代医学杂志》2011年第33期4196-4198,共3页China Journal of Modern Medicine

摘　　要：目的在肝切除术中,评价使用超声吸引刀(CUSA)不阻断血流和间断血流阻断技术对肝脏切除的差异。方法 2008年1月～2010年1月间,接受肝切除的非肝硬化患者37例,将其分为两组,一组17例为超声吸引刀(CUSA)不阻断血流,另一组20例采用间断血流阻断技术。方法观察两组术后1,3,7d肝功能各项指标包括血清丙氨酸氨基转移酶(ALT)、天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶(AST)、血清总胆红素(TBIL)恢复CUSA组明显优于间断血流阻断组(P<0.05)。术中出血及术后并发症的发生率,两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。但间断血流阻断行肝切除的手术时间短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论对于肝切除的非肝硬化患者来说,两种手术方法都适用于非肝硬化患者的肝切除。[ Objective ] To evaluate different cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator （CUSA） and intermittent vascular exclusion for liver resection. [Methods] From January 2008 to January 2010, non-cirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection were received cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator （n =17） or intermittent vascular exclusion （n =20）. [ Results ] The index of the liver function during postoperative 1, 3, 7 d in CUSA group including serum glutamate- pyruvate transaminase （ALT）, aspartic acid transaminase （AST）, and serum total bilirubin （TBIL）, was better than in- termittent vascular exclusion group （P 〈0.05）. The intra-operative blood loss and the incidence rate of complication among postoperative cases were no significant difference （P 〉0.05）. Operation times of intermittent vascular exclusion group was shorter than CUSA group, both had significant difference （P 〈0.05）. [ Conclusion ] Both cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator （CUSA） and intermittent vascular exclusion be used liver injury in non-cirrhotic patients under going liver resection.

关 键 词：肝切除 超声吸引刀 间歇性阻断 

分 类 号：R657[医药卫生—外科学] R615[医药卫生—临床医学]