中华泌尿外科杂志
中華泌尿外科雜誌
중화비뇨외과잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
2015年
8期
588-591
,共4页
李普%邵鹏飞%成功%孟小鑫%吕强%居小兵%华立新%王增军%殷长军
李普%邵鵬飛%成功%孟小鑫%呂彊%居小兵%華立新%王增軍%慇長軍
리보%소붕비%성공%맹소흠%려강%거소병%화립신%왕증군%은장군
前列腺肿瘤%腹腔镜%根治性前列腺切除术%开放手术%治疗结果
前列腺腫瘤%腹腔鏡%根治性前列腺切除術%開放手術%治療結果
전렬선종류%복강경%근치성전렬선절제술%개방수술%치료결과
Prostatic neoplasms%Laparoscopes%Radical prostatectomy%Open surgery%Treatment outcome
目的 比较经腹腔途径腹腔镜下根治性前列腺切除术(laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,LRP)与开放式根治性前列腺切除术(open radical prostatectomy,ORP)治疗早期局限性前列腺癌的临床疗效及安全性.方法 回顾性分析2003年3月至2014年12月连续395例行根治性前列腺切除术的病例资料.根据手术方式分为两组,其中LRP组325例,ORP组70例.两组患者年龄(P=0.364)、体质指数(P =0.360)、术前前列腺特异性抗原水平(P=0.076)、术前Gleason评分(P=0.839)及前列腺体积(P=0.241)比较差异均无统计学意义.比较两组的手术时间、术中出血量、肠道功能恢复时间、术后住院时间、术中及术后并发症、术后病理情况及生化复发率等指标.结果 LRP组和ORP组手术时间分别为(114±29)、(150±39) min(P =0.002),术中出血量分别为(248±96)、(569±166) ml(P ＜0.001),肠道功能恢复时间分别为(2.2±0.9)、(3.0±0.8) d(P =0.031),术后住院时间分别为(7.1±1.4)、(8.9±1.6) d(P =0.028),组间比较差异均有统计学意义.LRP组并发症发生率显著低于ORP组(P ＜0.001).LRP和ORP组切缘阳性率(P =0.397)及术后1、2年生化复发率(P =0.664、P=0.238)比较差异均无统计学意义.结论 腹腔镜手术治疗局限性前列腺癌具有创伤小、恢复快、并发症少等优点,在肿瘤控制方面与开放性手术具有相似的效果.
目的 比較經腹腔途徑腹腔鏡下根治性前列腺切除術(laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,LRP)與開放式根治性前列腺切除術(open radical prostatectomy,ORP)治療早期跼限性前列腺癌的臨床療效及安全性.方法 迴顧性分析2003年3月至2014年12月連續395例行根治性前列腺切除術的病例資料.根據手術方式分為兩組,其中LRP組325例,ORP組70例.兩組患者年齡(P=0.364)、體質指數(P =0.360)、術前前列腺特異性抗原水平(P=0.076)、術前Gleason評分(P=0.839)及前列腺體積(P=0.241)比較差異均無統計學意義.比較兩組的手術時間、術中齣血量、腸道功能恢複時間、術後住院時間、術中及術後併髮癥、術後病理情況及生化複髮率等指標.結果 LRP組和ORP組手術時間分彆為(114±29)、(150±39) min(P =0.002),術中齣血量分彆為(248±96)、(569±166) ml(P ＜0.001),腸道功能恢複時間分彆為(2.2±0.9)、(3.0±0.8) d(P =0.031),術後住院時間分彆為(7.1±1.4)、(8.9±1.6) d(P =0.028),組間比較差異均有統計學意義.LRP組併髮癥髮生率顯著低于ORP組(P ＜0.001).LRP和ORP組切緣暘性率(P =0.397)及術後1、2年生化複髮率(P =0.664、P=0.238)比較差異均無統計學意義.結論 腹腔鏡手術治療跼限性前列腺癌具有創傷小、恢複快、併髮癥少等優點,在腫瘤控製方麵與開放性手術具有相似的效果.
목적 비교경복강도경복강경하근치성전렬선절제술(laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,LRP)여개방식근치성전렬선절제술(open radical prostatectomy,ORP)치료조기국한성전렬선암적림상료효급안전성.방법 회고성분석2003년3월지2014년12월련속395례행근치성전렬선절제술적병례자료.근거수술방식분위량조,기중LRP조325례,ORP조70례.량조환자년령(P=0.364)、체질지수(P =0.360)、술전전렬선특이성항원수평(P=0.076)、술전Gleason평분(P=0.839)급전렬선체적(P=0.241)비교차이균무통계학의의.비교량조적수술시간、술중출혈량、장도공능회복시간、술후주원시간、술중급술후병발증、술후병리정황급생화복발솔등지표.결과 LRP조화ORP조수술시간분별위(114±29)、(150±39) min(P =0.002),술중출혈량분별위(248±96)、(569±166) ml(P ＜0.001),장도공능회복시간분별위(2.2±0.9)、(3.0±0.8) d(P =0.031),술후주원시간분별위(7.1±1.4)、(8.9±1.6) d(P =0.028),조간비교차이균유통계학의의.LRP조병발증발생솔현저저우ORP조(P ＜0.001).LRP화ORP조절연양성솔(P =0.397)급술후1、2년생화복발솔(P =0.664、P=0.238)비교차이균무통계학의의.결론 복강경수술치료국한성전렬선암구유창상소、회복쾌、병발증소등우점,재종류공제방면여개방성수술구유상사적효과.
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) for treatment of localized prostate cancer.Methods From March 2003 to December 2014,395 consecutive cases of radical prostatectomy were retrospectively analyzed.The patients were divided into 2 groups:LRP group with 325 cases and ORP group with 70 cases.There were no significant differences in age (P =0.364),body mass index (P =0.360),preoperative PSA level (P =0.076),preoperative Gleason score (P =0.839) and prostate volume (P =0.241) between LRP group and ORP group.Therapeutic effect was compared between the 2 groups.Results The differences of operative time (LRP:114 ± 29 min,ORP:150 ± 39 min,P =0.002),blood loss (248 ± 96,569 ± 166 ml,P ＜ 0.001),intestinal function recovery time (2.2 ± 0.9,3.0 ± 0.8 d,P =0.031),postoperative hospital stay (7.1 ± 1.4,8.9 ± 1.6 d,P =0.028) and complication rate(P ＜0.001) were significantly between the 2 groups.There were no significant differences in positive surgical margin rate(P =0.397) and 1-year or 2-year biochemical recurrence rate (P =0.664,P =0.238) between the 2 groups.Conclusion In the present cohort,compared with open surgery,LRP had advantages of fewer traumas,quicker recovery and fewer complications,while the tumor control was similar.
