中华普通外科学文献（电子版）
中華普通外科學文獻（電子版）
중화보통외과학문헌（전자판）
Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition)
2015年
6期
483-486
,共4页
阑尾切除术%腹腔镜技术%并发症
闌尾切除術%腹腔鏡技術%併髮癥
란미절제술%복강경기술%병발증
Appendectomy%Laparoscope%Complications
目的 比较腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)与开腹阑尾切除术(OA)治疗急阑尾炎的临床疗效及并发症.方法 选择2014年1月至2015年5月收治的拟行阑尾切除术的阑尾炎患者118例,将患者随机分为试验组和对照组,每组59例,试验组采用LA术,对照组采用OA术,比较两组患者的临床效果及并发症发生情况,评价急性和慢性阑尾炎行腹腔镜手术的效果.结果 与对照组比较,试验组的手术时间延长,而住院时间、术后首次下床、排气及进食时间均明显缩短,24 h镇痛药物使用率也显著减少,住院费用明显增加(t=14.342、6.916、4.166、9.527、8.036,χ2=5.950, t=32.663,P<0.05).试验组中急性阑尾炎患者34例,与25例慢性阑尾炎患者比较,手术时间、住院时间、术后首次排气及进食时间均明显延长,术中出血量明显增加(t=8.195、1.776、5.329、4.337、3.757,P<0.05).试验组术后24 h、48 h时白细胞(WBC)、C反应蛋白(CRP)水平均显著低于对照组(P<0.05);伤口感染、腹腔脓肿的发生率及总发生率显著低于对照组(χ2=4.827、4.140、10.602,P<0.05).结论 LA治疗急性及慢性阑尾炎均安全有效,可减少术后并发症,促进术后恢复.
目的 比較腹腔鏡闌尾切除術(LA)與開腹闌尾切除術(OA)治療急闌尾炎的臨床療效及併髮癥.方法 選擇2014年1月至2015年5月收治的擬行闌尾切除術的闌尾炎患者118例,將患者隨機分為試驗組和對照組,每組59例,試驗組採用LA術,對照組採用OA術,比較兩組患者的臨床效果及併髮癥髮生情況,評價急性和慢性闌尾炎行腹腔鏡手術的效果.結果 與對照組比較,試驗組的手術時間延長,而住院時間、術後首次下床、排氣及進食時間均明顯縮短,24 h鎮痛藥物使用率也顯著減少,住院費用明顯增加(t=14.342、6.916、4.166、9.527、8.036,χ2=5.950, t=32.663,P<0.05).試驗組中急性闌尾炎患者34例,與25例慢性闌尾炎患者比較,手術時間、住院時間、術後首次排氣及進食時間均明顯延長,術中齣血量明顯增加(t=8.195、1.776、5.329、4.337、3.757,P<0.05).試驗組術後24 h、48 h時白細胞(WBC)、C反應蛋白(CRP)水平均顯著低于對照組(P<0.05);傷口感染、腹腔膿腫的髮生率及總髮生率顯著低于對照組(χ2=4.827、4.140、10.602,P<0.05).結論 LA治療急性及慢性闌尾炎均安全有效,可減少術後併髮癥,促進術後恢複.
목적 비교복강경란미절제술(LA)여개복란미절제술(OA)치료급란미염적림상료효급병발증.방법 선택2014년1월지2015년5월수치적의행란미절제술적란미염환자118례,장환자수궤분위시험조화대조조,매조59례,시험조채용LA술,대조조채용OA술,비교량조환자적림상효과급병발증발생정황,평개급성화만성란미염행복강경수술적효과.결과 여대조조비교,시험조적수술시간연장,이주원시간、술후수차하상、배기급진식시간균명현축단,24 h진통약물사용솔야현저감소,주원비용명현증가(t=14.342、6.916、4.166、9.527、8.036,χ2=5.950, t=32.663,P<0.05).시험조중급성란미염환자34례,여25례만성란미염환자비교,수술시간、주원시간、술후수차배기급진식시간균명현연장,술중출혈량명현증가(t=8.195、1.776、5.329、4.337、3.757,P<0.05).시험조술후24 h、48 h시백세포(WBC)、C반응단백(CRP)수평균현저저우대조조(P<0.05);상구감염、복강농종적발생솔급총발생솔현저저우대조조(χ2=4.827、4.140、10.602,P<0.05).결론 LA치료급성급만성란미염균안전유효,가감소술후병발증,촉진술후회복.
Objective To compare the efficacy and complications between laparoscopic appen-dectomy (LA) and open appendectomy (OA). Methods One hundred and eighteen appendicitis patients undergoing appendectomy were chosen from January 2014 to May 2015. All the cases were divided into the trial group (59 cases, received LA) and the control group (59 cases, received OA). The clinical efficacy and complications of two groups and the outcome of LA for acute and chronic appendicitis were compared. Results Compared with control group, the operation time increased in the trial group, while hospital stay, postoperative first bed-off time, passing flatus, and first food-taking shortened;usage of anesthetics within 24 h reduced, and hospitalization expenses increased (t=14.342, 6.916, 4.166, 9.527, 8.036, χ2=5.950, t=32.663, P<0.05). In the trial group, compared with 25 cases with chronic appendicitis, the other 34 cases with acute appendicitis had longer operation time, hospital stay, time of postoperative first pass-ing flatus and first food-taking, more intraoperative blood loss (t=8.195, 1.776, 5.329, 4.337, 3.757, P<0.05). The levels of WBC, CRP at 24 h, 48 h after operation in the trial group were significantly lower than those in control group (P<0.05). The incidence of wound infection, celiac abscess and total incidence in experimental group were significantly lower than those in control group (χ2=4.827, 4.140, 10.602, P<0.05). Conclusion LA is safe and effective in the treatment of acute and chronic appendicitis, which can reduce the postoperative complications and promote postoperative recovery.
