CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探讨腹腔镜下与开腹手术行胃穿孔修补术的综合疗效对比情况。方法分析我院2009年3月~2013年4月收治的67例急性胃穿孔患者临床资料，依据治疗方式的不同进行临床分组，开腹组27例和腹腔镜组40例。结果腹腔镜组术中出血量、下床活动时间、胃肠功能恢复时间、住院时间和冲洗液量均低于开腹组（t=12.37、7.40、8.48、8.32、35.75，P＜0.05），腹腔镜组感染、穿孔复发、腹腔脓肿发生率均低于开腹组（x2=11.75，11.75，11.75，P＜0.05），差异均有统计学意义。结论腹腔镜下行胃穿孔修补术创伤较小，术后并发症少，值得临床借鉴应用。
목적：탐토복강경하여개복수술행위천공수보술적종합료효대비정황。방법분석아원2009년3월~2013년4월수치적67례급성위천공환자림상자료，의거치료방식적불동진행림상분조，개복조27례화복강경조40례。결과복강경조술중출혈량、하상활동시간、위장공능회복시간、주원시간화충세액량균저우개복조（t=12.37、7.40、8.48、8.32、35.75，P＜0.05），복강경조감염、천공복발、복강농종발생솔균저우개복조（x2=11.75，11.75，11.75，P＜0.05），차이균유통계학의의。결론복강경하행위천공수보술창상교소，술후병발증소，치득림상차감응용。
Objective To explore comparison of comprehensive curative effect of gastric perforation repair by laparoscope and laparotomy operation. MethodsClinical data of 67 patients with acute gastric perforation who were admitted to our hospital were analyzed and they were allocated to the laparotomy group with 27 cases and the laparoscope group 40 cases according to different treatment methods.Results The intraoperative blood loss, leaving bed time, gastrointestinal function recovery time, hospitalization stays and The volume of rinsing of the laparoscope group were all lower than those of the laparotomy group(t=12.37, 7.40, 8.48, 8.32, 35.75,P<0.05). Infection, perforation recurrence and incidence of abdominal abscess of the laparoscope group were lower than those of the laparotomy group(x2=11.75,11.75, 11.75,P<0.05). The difference was statistical significant.Conclusion Gastric perforation repair by laparoscope has fewer trauma and postoperative complications worthy of clinical promotion and application.