中国基层医药
中國基層醫藥
중국기층의약
CHINESE JOURNAL OF PRIMARY MEDICINE AND PHARMACY
2009年
8期
1394-1395
,共2页
胆囊切除术%腹腔镜%胆囊切除术%胆总管结石
膽囊切除術%腹腔鏡%膽囊切除術%膽總管結石
담낭절제술%복강경%담낭절제술%담총관결석
Cholecystectomy%laparoscopic%Cholecystectomy%Choledocholithiasis
目的 比较腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术与开腹手术治疗胆总管结石的临床效果.方法 将46例胆总管结石患者按住院先后随机分为腹腔镜组21例和开腹手术组25例,比较的手术时间、住院时间、肛门排气时间、术后使用止痛剂、手术出血量和术后并发症等情况.结果 腹腔镜组住院时间(10.5±2.4)d、胃肠功能恢复时间(27.2±9.4)h、术后使用止痛剂率(28.6%)与开腹手术组的(14.3±2.5)d、(54.6±12.5)h、88.0%,比较差异有统计学意义(t=2.03、1.98,X2=16.92,均P＜0.05),而两组的手术时间和术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义(t=1.76、1.89,均P＞0.05).腹腔镜组切口感染率(0%)较开腹组(24.0%)低(X2=3.87,P＜0.05),两组均无胆漏、结石残余、腹腔感染等发生.结论 腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术是安全、有效、可行的,与开腹手术相比具有创伤小、痛苦轻、术后恢复快,并发症少等优点.
目的 比較腹腔鏡膽總管切開取石術與開腹手術治療膽總管結石的臨床效果.方法 將46例膽總管結石患者按住院先後隨機分為腹腔鏡組21例和開腹手術組25例,比較的手術時間、住院時間、肛門排氣時間、術後使用止痛劑、手術齣血量和術後併髮癥等情況.結果 腹腔鏡組住院時間(10.5±2.4)d、胃腸功能恢複時間(27.2±9.4)h、術後使用止痛劑率(28.6%)與開腹手術組的(14.3±2.5)d、(54.6±12.5)h、88.0%,比較差異有統計學意義(t=2.03、1.98,X2=16.92,均P＜0.05),而兩組的手術時間和術中齣血量比較差異無統計學意義(t=1.76、1.89,均P＞0.05).腹腔鏡組切口感染率(0%)較開腹組(24.0%)低(X2=3.87,P＜0.05),兩組均無膽漏、結石殘餘、腹腔感染等髮生.結論 腹腔鏡膽總管切開取石術是安全、有效、可行的,與開腹手術相比具有創傷小、痛苦輕、術後恢複快,併髮癥少等優點.
목적 비교복강경담총관절개취석술여개복수술치료담총관결석적림상효과.방법 장46례담총관결석환자안주원선후수궤분위복강경조21례화개복수술조25례,비교적수술시간、주원시간、항문배기시간、술후사용지통제、수술출혈량화술후병발증등정황.결과 복강경조주원시간(10.5±2.4)d、위장공능회복시간(27.2±9.4)h、술후사용지통제솔(28.6%)여개복수술조적(14.3±2.5)d、(54.6±12.5)h、88.0%,비교차이유통계학의의(t=2.03、1.98,X2=16.92,균P＜0.05),이량조적수술시간화술중출혈량비교차이무통계학의의(t=1.76、1.89,균P＞0.05).복강경조절구감염솔(0%)교개복조(24.0%)저(X2=3.87,P＜0.05),량조균무담루、결석잔여、복강감염등발생.결론 복강경담총관절개취석술시안전、유효、가행적,여개복수술상비구유창상소、통고경、술후회복쾌,병발증소등우점.
Objective To compare the therapeutic effects of laparoscopic and open surgery treatment for choledocholithiasis.Methods Forty-six cases with choledocholithiasis were randomly divided into laparoscopic surgery group(n = 21)and open surgery group(n = 25).Comparison was conducted between the two groups in terms of operative time,hospitalization day,anorechlnl exhaust time,cases of postoperative pain,the amount of intraoperative bleeding and postoperative complications.Results Hospitalization day(10.5 ±2.4d),anorechlnl exhaust time(27.2 ±9.4h),cases of postoperative pain(28.6%)in the laparoscopic surgery group were significantly better than those in open surgery group(14.3 ±2.5d,54.6 ±12.5h,88.0%)(P ＜0.05).The operative time and the amount of intraoperative bleeding was not significantly different between two groups(P ＞ 0.05).The rate of infection of incisional wound in the laparoscopic surgery group(0%)was lower than that of open surgery group 24.0%(P ＜ 0.05).No residual calculi and bile leakage were found in both groups.The other postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups(P ＞ 0.05).Conclusion Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy is safe,effective and feasible.Compare with open surgery,it is a less invasive proceduce for the treatment of choledocholithiasis with the virtue of little trauma,fast recovery,short hospitalization days and few complication.
