湖南师范大学学报（医学版）
湖南師範大學學報（醫學版）
호남사범대학학보（의학판）
Journal of Hunan Normal University (Medical Science)
2015年
4期
127-129
,共3页
高建军%张国雷%龙士兵%何志胜
高建軍%張國雷%龍士兵%何誌勝
고건군%장국뢰%룡사병%하지성
急性胃穿孔%单纯修补术%胃大切手术%临床疗效
急性胃穿孔%單純脩補術%胃大切手術%臨床療效
급성위천공%단순수보술%위대절수술%림상료효
acute gastric perforation%simple repair%subtotal gastrectomy operation%clinical effect
目的：探讨单纯修补术和胃大部分切除术治疗急性胃穿孔的临床疗效。方法：将我院消化科2008年6月到2013年6月的急性胃穿孔的患者80例，随机的分为单纯修补组和切除组，每组各40例，单纯修补组行单纯的修补术，切除组行胃大切手术，比较两组治疗方式的效果、手术时间、疼痛等差异。结果：单纯修补组总有效率为92.5%明显高于传统的胃大部分切除组的75%；两组中单纯修补组的手术时间、术后疼痛评分、住院时间等明显短于或者少于切除组；两治疗方法中单纯修补组的复发率为15%高于切除组的2.5%；单纯修补组的术后不良事件的发生率为17.5%高于切除组的10%。结论：单纯修补术治疗急性胃穿孔的有效性高于胃大切手术，并且手术时间、住院时间、术中出血量等少于胃大切手术，但是单纯修补术术后的复发率以及不良事件的发生率高于胃大切手术，所以在临床治疗时应根据病情选择合适的方案。
目的：探討單純脩補術和胃大部分切除術治療急性胃穿孔的臨床療效。方法：將我院消化科2008年6月到2013年6月的急性胃穿孔的患者80例，隨機的分為單純脩補組和切除組，每組各40例，單純脩補組行單純的脩補術，切除組行胃大切手術，比較兩組治療方式的效果、手術時間、疼痛等差異。結果：單純脩補組總有效率為92.5%明顯高于傳統的胃大部分切除組的75%；兩組中單純脩補組的手術時間、術後疼痛評分、住院時間等明顯短于或者少于切除組；兩治療方法中單純脩補組的複髮率為15%高于切除組的2.5%；單純脩補組的術後不良事件的髮生率為17.5%高于切除組的10%。結論：單純脩補術治療急性胃穿孔的有效性高于胃大切手術，併且手術時間、住院時間、術中齣血量等少于胃大切手術，但是單純脩補術術後的複髮率以及不良事件的髮生率高于胃大切手術，所以在臨床治療時應根據病情選擇閤適的方案。
목적：탐토단순수보술화위대부분절제술치료급성위천공적림상료효。방법：장아원소화과2008년6월도2013년6월적급성위천공적환자80례，수궤적분위단순수보조화절제조，매조각40례，단순수보조행단순적수보술，절제조행위대절수술，비교량조치료방식적효과、수술시간、동통등차이。결과：단순수보조총유효솔위92.5%명현고우전통적위대부분절제조적75%；량조중단순수보조적수술시간、술후동통평분、주원시간등명현단우혹자소우절제조；량치료방법중단순수보조적복발솔위15%고우절제조적2.5%；단순수보조적술후불량사건적발생솔위17.5%고우절제조적10%。결론：단순수보술치료급성위천공적유효성고우위대절수술，병차수술시간、주원시간、술중출혈량등소우위대절수술，단시단순수보술술후적복발솔이급불량사건적발생솔고우위대절수술，소이재림상치료시응근거병정선택합괄적방안。
ObjectiveTo investigate the simple repair andsubtotal resection in the treatment of clinical curative ef-fectof acute gastric perforation. Methods80 cases of acutegastric our hospital in 2008 June to 2013 June perforationpati ents, randomly divided into simple repair group andresection group, 40 cases in each group, repair group underwent sim-ple simple repair, operation resection group underwent subtotal gastrectomy, treatment methods and compare the effect of two groups, operation time the difference, pain etc. Results simple repair group, the total efficiency of 92.5% was signifi-cantly higher than that ofthe traditional subtotal gastrectomy group 75%, the difference was statistically significant; the two group operation time, postoperative pain score after simple repair group, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter than or less than the resection group,with statistical significance in the difference between the twobetween group; simple re-pair group ofrecurrence was 15% higher than 2.5% resection grouprate of two methods of treatment, the difference was statisti-cally significant; the incidence rate was 20% higher than that of resection group 10% simple repairgroup postoperative adverse events, but no significant difference. Conclusion simple repair is effective in the treatment of acute gastric perforation is higher than the stomach cutting operation, and the operation time,hospitalization time, amount of bleeding, less than subtotal gastrec-tomy operation, but simple repair recurrence rateand the incidence of adverse events was higher than that of subtotal gastrecto-my operation, so in the clinicaltreatment should be chosen according to the condition of the scheme.
