论文部分内容阅读
目的研究小切口食管癌根治术与传统切口食管癌根治术在胸段食管癌治疗中的疗效及并发症区别。方法 86例胸段食管癌患者根据治疗方法不同分为小切口组与传统组,各43例。小切口组患者采用肩胛下角后外侧小切口入路,传统组采用第5肋间前侧常规切口入路。切除癌变食管,清扫淋巴结并术后引流。观察比较两组的临床疗效及并发症情况。结果小切口组患者的切口长度、术中出血量、术后镇痛时间及上肢恢复功能时间均明显优于传统组(P<0.01);小切口组总并发症发生率11.63%低于传统组46.5%(P<0.01)。结论采用小切口行食管癌根治术有助于减少术中损伤,加快术后恢复,同时减少术中对肺组织及喉返神经损伤从而降低术后并发症发生率。
Objective To study the curative effect and complications of small incision esophageal cancer radical mastectomy and conventional incision esophageal cancer radical mastectomy in thoracic esophageal cancer. Methods Totally 86 cases of thoracic esophageal cancer patients were divided into small incision group and traditional group according to different treatment methods, 43 cases in each group. The patients in the small incision group had a small incision on the posterolateral subscapular angle, while the traditional group adopted the conventional incision in the anterior intercostal space on the 5th intercostal space. Removal of cancerous esophagus, lymph node dissection and drainage. The clinical efficacy and complications of the two groups were observed and compared. Results The incision length, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative analgesia time and recovery time of upper limbs in the small incision group were significantly better than those in the traditional group (P <0.01). The overall complication rate in the small incision group was 11.63% lower than that in the traditional group 46.5% (P <0.01). Conclusion Small incision esophagectomy is helpful to reduce the intraoperative injury, accelerate the recovery after operation, reduce the intraoperative lung injury and recurrent laryngeal nerve, and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications.