CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术经腹腔膀胱前入路与膀胱后入路的疗效。方法选择四川省人民医院2010年7月~2015年3月收治的前列腺癌患者80例临床资料,依据手术入路不同分为膀胱前入路组(40例)和膀胱后入路组(40例)。观察两组前列腺癌患者手术时间、术中出血量、留置尿管时间、住院时间、术后生活质量影响情况。结果膀胱前入路组前列腺癌患者手术时间[(170.2±55.6)min]、术中出血量[(540.8±105.5)mL]、留置尿管时间[(6.0±1.4)d]、住院时间[(5.5±2.0)d]均低于膀胱后入路组[(225.1±60.3)min、(660.8±124.1)ml、(5.0±1.0)d、(7.5±2.5)d],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),膀胱前入路组患者术后质量不受影响或轻度影响比例(90%,36/40)高于膀胱后入路组[70%,28/40],生活质量中度或重度影响比例(10%,4/40)低于膀胱后入路组[30%,12/40],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术经腹腔膀胱前入路创伤小,恢复快,预后良好,值得临床推广应用。
목적：비교복강경하전렬선암근치술경복강방광전입로여방광후입로적료효。방법선택사천성인민의원2010년7월~2015년3월수치적전렬선암환자80례림상자료,의거수술입로불동분위방광전입로조(40례)화방광후입로조(40례)。관찰량조전렬선암환자수술시간、술중출혈량、류치뇨관시간、주원시간、술후생활질량영향정황。결과방광전입로조전렬선암환자수술시간[(170.2±55.6)min]、술중출혈량[(540.8±105.5)mL]、류치뇨관시간[(6.0±1.4)d]、주원시간[(5.5±2.0)d]균저우방광후입로조[(225.1±60.3)min、(660.8±124.1)ml、(5.0±1.0)d、(7.5±2.5)d],차이유통계학의의(P<0.05),방광전입로조환자술후질량불수영향혹경도영향비례(90%,36/40)고우방광후입로조[70%,28/40],생활질량중도혹중도영향비례(10%,4/40)저우방광후입로조[30%,12/40],차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론복강경하전렬선암근치술경복강방광전입로창상소,회복쾌,예후량호,치득림상추엄응용。
Objective To compare the effect of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed via bladder the anterior and posterior approaches. Methods From July 2010 to March 2015, in Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, the clini-cal data of 80 patients with radical prostatectomy were selected and divided into bladder anterior approach group (40 cases) and bladder posterior approach group (40 cases), accoding to the operative approaches. The operation time, in-traoperative blood loss, indwelling catheter time, hospital stays, postoperative life quality of two groups were detected. Results The operation time [(170.2±55.6) min], intraoperative blood loss [(540.8±105.5) mL], indwelling catheter time [(6.0±1.4) d], hospital stays [(5.5±2.0) d] of bladder anterior approach group were lower than those of bladder posterior approach group [(225.1±60.3) min, (660.8±124.1) mL, (5.0±1.0) d, (7.5±2.5) d], the differences were statistically signifi-cant (P< 0.05), the proportion of no or mild affecting postoperative quality of life in bladder anterior approach group (90%, 36/40) was higher than that in bladder posterior approach group (70%, 28/40), proportion of moderate or severe affecting postoperative quality of life (10%, 4/40) was lower than that in bladder posterior approach group (30%, 12/40),the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion The injury of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed via bladder posterior approach is little, recovery is quick,prognosis is good, which is to be used.