CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探讨腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术采用中间入路法治疗结肠癌的方法及效果。方法选取50例结肠癌患者进行随机分组，其中研究组25例采用中间入路法进行腹腔镜辅助下结肠癌根治手术，对照组25例采用常规开腹手术。结果研究组患者术中出血量（93.2±28.2）ml，明显低于对照组（128.3±32.8）ml；研究组患者手术时间（132.8±32.8）min，明显少于对照组（167.9±38.2）min，差异均具有统计学意义（均 P＜0.01）。研究组淋巴结清扫（16.2±5.3）枚，标本切除长度（24.3±7.2）cm，对照组患者淋巴结清扫（15.4±3.2）枚，标本切除长度（22.8±7.6）cm，两组数据差异无统计学意义（均 P＞0.05）。研究组患者术后排气时间、饮食恢复时间和住院时间分别为（2.2±0.3）天、（3.0±0.5）天和（9.8±2.2）天，均少于对照组的（4.2±0.6）天、（5.3±0.4）天和（15.5±3.6）天，差异均有统计学意义（均 P＜0.01）。研究组患者并发症发生率为12%，明显高于对照组的36%，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论腹腔镜辅助下进行结肠癌根治手术可大大提高手术的效率，提高治疗安全性，促进患者早期康复，并可减轻痛苦，提高生存质量。
목적：탐토복강경보조결장암근치술채용중간입로법치료결장암적방법급효과。방법선취50례결장암환자진행수궤분조，기중연구조25례채용중간입로법진행복강경보조하결장암근치수술，대조조25례채용상규개복수술。결과연구조환자술중출혈량（93.2±28.2）ml，명현저우대조조（128.3±32.8）ml；연구조환자수술시간（132.8±32.8）min，명현소우대조조（167.9±38.2）min，차이균구유통계학의의（균 P＜0.01）。연구조림파결청소（16.2±5.3）매，표본절제장도（24.3±7.2）cm，대조조환자림파결청소（15.4±3.2）매，표본절제장도（22.8±7.6）cm，량조수거차이무통계학의의（균 P＞0.05）。연구조환자술후배기시간、음식회복시간화주원시간분별위（2.2±0.3）천、（3.0±0.5）천화（9.8±2.2）천，균소우대조조적（4.2±0.6）천、（5.3±0.4）천화（15.5±3.6）천，차이균유통계학의의（균 P＜0.01）。연구조환자병발증발생솔위12%，명현고우대조조적36%，차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。결론복강경보조하진행결장암근치수술가대대제고수술적효솔，제고치료안전성，촉진환자조기강복，병가감경통고，제고생존질량。
Objective To investigate the modality and effect of laparoscopic medial approach in radical resection for colon cancer. Method 50 patients with colon cancer were randomized. Twenty-five cases in the study group were administered with radical resection for colon cancer by laparoscopic medial approach, and another 25 cases in the control group received open surgery. Result The intraoperative blood loss in study group [(93.2±28.2) ml] was obviously lower than that of control group [(128.3±32.8) ml]; And less operative time [(132.8±32.8) min] was taken for study group compared with control group [(167.9±38.2) min], of which the differences were significant (all P<0.01). In respect of lymph node dissection, there were (16.2±5.3) vs (15.4±3.2) nodes dissected, and (24.3±7.2) cm vs (22.8±7.6) cm of specimens resected for study group vs control group. No significant difference was observed for pa-tient characteristics (P>0.05). The postoperative exhaust time, eating recovery time and hospital stay [(2.2±0.3) d, (3± 0.5) d, and (9.8±2.2) d, respectively] were all significantly less than those of the control group [(4.2±0.6) d, (5.3±0.4) d, (15.5±3.6) d, respectively] (all P<0.01). And less complications were observed in study group compared with con-trol group (12% vs 36%, P<0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic medial approach in radical resection for colon cancer not only greatly improves operative efficiency, but also guarantees safety of treatment, and it promotes early recovery for patients, as well as improves the quality of life.