CAJ | 학술논문

目的:比较经尿道膀胱肿瘤电切术(TURBT)和经尿道膀胱肿瘤等离子切除术(PKRBT)治疗膀胱肿瘤的疗效.方法:将126例膀胱肿瘤患者分成观察组和对照组各63例,分别给予 PKRBT 和 TURBT 治疗,观察两组手术时间、平均住院时间、肉眼血尿时间、膀胱冲洗时间、尿管留置时间和并发症发生率、2年内复发率、闭孔神经发生率.结果:观察组平均住院时间、肉眼血尿时间、膀胱冲洗时间、尿管留置时间均较对照组短(P<0.05);观察组并发症发生率、2年内复发率、闭孔神经发生率均明显低于对照组(P<0.05).结论:PKRBT治疗膀胱肿瘤弥补了 TURBT 术式的不足,疗效优于 TURBT.
목적:비교경뇨도방광종류전절술(TURBT)화경뇨도방광종류등리자절제술(PKRBT)치료방광종류적료효.방법:장126례방광종류환자분성관찰조화대조조각63례,분별급여 PKRBT 화 TURBT 치료,관찰량조수술시간、평균주원시간、육안혈뇨시간、방광충세시간、뇨관류치시간화병발증발생솔、2년내복발솔、폐공신경발생솔.결과:관찰조평균주원시간、육안혈뇨시간、방광충세시간、뇨관류치시간균교대조조단(P<0.05);관찰조병발증발생솔、2년내복발솔、폐공신경발생솔균명현저우대조조(P<0.05).결론:PKRBT치료방광종류미보료 TURBT 술식적불족,료효우우 TURBT.
Objective:To contrast the efficacy of TURBT and PKRBT on the treatment of bladder tumor.Method:126 cases of bladder tumor are divided into the observation group and the control group(each with 63 cases),treated with PKRBT and TURBT respectively.Observations are carried out about both groups’operation time,average LOS,time of macroscopic hematuria,time of bladder washing,time of catheter indwelling,complication rate,recurrence rate within 2 years and obturator nerve.Result:As for the observation group,its average LOS,time of macroscopic hematuria,time of bladder washing,time of catheter indwelling were shorter than those of the control group(P<0.05),and its complication rate,recurrence rate within 2 years and obturator nerve incidence were all significantly lower than those of the control group(P<0.05).Conclusion:As for the treatment of bladder tumor,PKRBT can make up the deficiency of TURBT,and has better efficacy than TURBT.