CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较全胸腔镜单向式肺叶切除术与解剖性肺叶切除术在周围型非小细胞肺癌治疗中的临床应用。方法回顾分析86例胸腔镜肺癌根治术患者的临床资料,其中42例行全胸腔镜单向式肺叶切除术(单向式组),44例行全胸腔镜解剖性肺叶切除术(解剖性组)。比较分析两组肺叶切除时间、术中出血量、术中意外损伤率、中转开胸率、术后引流管放置时间、淋巴结清扫目数、术后并发症发生率及治疗费用等。结果两组均无围手术期死亡病例。两组患者在淋巴结清扫数目、术后胸腔引流管放置时间及术后并发症发生率等方面差异无统计学意义(P>0．05)；单向式组在手术时间、术中出血量、术中意外损伤发生率、中转开胸率和治疗费用等均优于解剖性组,差异有统计学意义( P<0．05)。结论全胸腔镜单向式肺叶切除术治疗周围型非小细胞肺癌与解剖性肺叶切除术相比,具有同样根治效果,且更安全、更微创、费用低。
목적：비교전흉강경단향식폐협절제술여해부성폐협절제술재주위형비소세포폐암치료중적림상응용。방법회고분석86례흉강경폐암근치술환자적림상자료,기중42례행전흉강경단향식폐협절제술(단향식조),44례행전흉강경해부성폐협절제술(해부성조)。비교분석량조폐협절제시간、술중출혈량、술중의외손상솔、중전개흉솔、술후인류관방치시간、림파결청소목수、술후병발증발생솔급치료비용등。결과량조균무위수술기사망병례。량조환자재림파결청소수목、술후흉강인류관방치시간급술후병발증발생솔등방면차이무통계학의의(P>0．05)；단향식조재수술시간、술중출혈량、술중의외손상발생솔、중전개흉솔화치료비용등균우우해부성조,차이유통계학의의( P<0．05)。결론전흉강경단향식폐협절제술치료주위형비소세포폐암여해부성폐협절제술상비,구유동양근치효과,차경안전、경미창、비용저。
Objective To compare complete thoracoscopic propelled lobectomy by means of one-way with that by means of anatomy-way in the treatment of peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The clinical data of 86 cases of peripheral non-small-cell lung canc-er patients in this hospital were analyzed retrospectively, and the patients were divided into the group of thoracoscopic propelled lobectomy (42 cases) and the group of thoracoscopic anatomical lobectomy (44 cases), then the difference between the two groups was compared in terms of the duration of lobectomy, the volume of bleeding during operation, intraoperative incidental injury rate, the rate of conversion thora-cotomy, the retention time of drainage tube after operation, the amount of removed lymph node, the incidence of postoperative complications, and the cost of treatment. Results Both groups had no death cases in the perioperative period. The two groups had no difference in the re-tention time of drainage tube after operation, the amount of removed lymph node, and the incidence of postoperative complications ( P >0. 05). The duration of lobectomy, the volume of bleeding during operation, the intraoperative incidental injury rate, the rate of conversion thoracotomy and the cost of treatment of the group of thoracoscopic propelled lobectomy was lower than those of the group of thoracoscopic ana-tomical lobectomy( P<0. 05 ) . Conclusion In the treatment of peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer, thoracoscopic propelled lobectomy and thoracoscopic anatomical lobectomy have the same radical effect; furthermore, thoracoscopic propelled lobectomy has the advantages of being safer, more minimally invasive, lower cost, and easier to learn.