两种手术方式治疗乙状结肠癌的效果比较

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (957 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the efficacy of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for patients with sigmoid colon cancer. Methods A total of 50 patients with sigmoid colon cancer who underwent emergency surgery in the Characteristics Medical Center of Chinese People's Armed Police Force from June 2016 to June 2023 were selected and divided into an observation group and a control group according to the random number table method, with 25 patients in each group. The control group was treated with traditional open surgery, and the observation group was treated with laparoscopic surgery. The incidence of postoperative complications, levels of inflammatory factors, leukocytes and neutrophils were compared between the two groups. Results The average operation time of the observation group was significantly longer than that of the control group, but there was no statistical significance. The incidence of postoperative incision infection complications in the observation group was 0% (0/25), which was significantly lower than 16.0% (4/25) in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05); The intraoperative blood loss, postoperative bowel sound recovery time and hospital stay of the observation group were lower than those of the control group, the incidence of postoperative complications and the levels of TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, WBC and ANC were significantly lower than those of the control group, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions Laparoscopic surgery is effective in the treatment of sigmoid colon cancer, with less intraoperative blood loss, which can reduce the occurrence of complications, shorten the recovery time of bowel sounds, reduce the length of hospital stay, and reduce the level of pro-inflammatory factors.

Key words： sigmoid carcinoma laparoscopic surgery inflammatory factor level complication open surgery

Received: 10 June 2023

ZTFLH:

R445.1

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	FU Jingnan
	ZHOU li

Cite this article:

FU Jingnan,ZHOU li. Comparison of the effects of two surgical modalities for sigmoid colon cancer[J]. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2024, 35(3): 205-208.

URL:

http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/ OR http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/Y2024/V35/I3/205

[7]	阎立凯.11例乙状结肠直肠癌术后吻合口瘘的临床分析与处理[J].河南大学学报(医学版),2011,30(3):211-212.
[1]	钟石发.腹腔镜乙状结肠癌根治术中行保留SRA的D3淋巴结清扫的疗效与安全性评估[J].基层医学论坛,2023,27(14):142-144.
[8]	赵世栋,叶颖江,申占龙.腹腔镜结直肠癌手术中出血原因及对策[J].中国实用外科杂志,2022,42(11):1305-1307+1311.
[2]	王志强,郭治源,穆向明.腹腔镜乙状结肠癌根治术的研究进展[J].中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版),2020,13(6):381-384.
[3]	达布西力特,郑皓,韩承新.左半结肠癌合并急性肠梗阻肠减压后腹腔镜辅助Ⅰ期切除吻合术效果[J].武警医学,2023,34(1):10-13.
[9]	韩子昊.结肠癌根治术术后早期肠梗阻危险因素分析[D].长春:吉林大学,2023.
[4]	中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会.中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2020版)[J].中华消化外科杂志, 2020,19(6):563-588.
[10]	成秉禄,王殿枫,孙志军,等.结肠癌术后切口感染的危险因素分析[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2018,23(11):841-843,860.
[5]	谢丽霞,柴小青,疏树华,等.羟考酮用于术后患者自控静脉镇痛对老年结肠癌患者术后疼痛和胃肠功能的影响[J].麻醉安全与质控,2018,2(6):317-320.
[11]	Hui C, Baclay R, Liu K, et al. Rectosigmoid cancer-rectal cancer or sigmoid cancer?[J].Am J Clin Oncol, 2022,45(8):333-337.
[6]	中国胃肠肿瘤外科联盟,中国抗癌协会胃癌专业委员会.中国胃肠肿瘤外科术后并发症诊断登记规范专家共识(2018版)[J].中国实用外科杂志,2018,38(6):589-595.
[12]	王志强,穆向明.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗乙状结肠癌的效果及安全性分析[J].齐齐哈尔医学院学报,2020,41(20):2523-2525.
[7]	阎立凯.11例乙状结肠直肠癌术后吻合口瘘的临床分析与处理[J].河南大学学报(医学版),2011,30(3):211-212.
[13]	郭斌.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗乙状结肠癌临床对比分析[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2019,6(22):95-96.
[8]	赵世栋,叶颖江,申占龙.腹腔镜结直肠癌手术中出血原因及对策[J].中国实用外科杂志,2022,42(11):1305-1307+1311.
[14]	Chen Z Z, Xu S Z, Ding Z J, et al. Comparison between laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for left colorectal cancer: a randomized controlled study with 3-year follow-up results[J]. Zhonghua Wei Chang, 2022,25(7):604-611.
[9]	韩子昊.结肠癌根治术术后早期肠梗阻危险因素分析[D].长春:吉林大学,2023.
[15]	Liu C, Chu D, Kalantar Z K, et al. Cytokines: from clinical significance to quantification[J]. Adv Sci,2021,8(15):e2004433.
[10]	成秉禄,王殿枫,孙志军,等.结肠癌术后切口感染的危险因素分析[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2018,23(11):841-843,860.
[16]	龙鼎,喻莉,吴晓灵. 全身炎症反应综合征患者血浆D-二聚体与细胞因子动态变化的研究[C]/中华医学会,中华医学会重症医学分会.中华医学会第五次全国重症医学大会论文汇编,2011:571.
[17]	罗浪,王进,曹赛红,等.PCT、CRP、NEU%及WBC在血流感染早期诊断中的应用研究[J/OL].检验医学与临床,1-4[2023-12-07]http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/50.1167.R.20231124.1540.008.html.
[11]	Hui C, Baclay R, Liu K, et al. Rectosigmoid cancer-rectal cancer or sigmoid cancer?[J].Am J Clin Oncol, 2022,45(8):333-337.
[18]	古丽娜尔·哈布赛提.探讨血清降钙素原与白细胞及中性粒细胞对细菌性感染的诊断价值[J].中国农村卫生,2016,1(14):13.
[12]	王志强,穆向明.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗乙状结肠癌的效果及安全性分析[J].齐齐哈尔医学院学报,2020,41(20):2523-2525.
[19]	Zhang Y, Liu C, Nistala K R, et al. Open versus laparoscopic Hartmann’s procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Colorectal Dis,2022,37(12):2421-2430.
[13]	郭斌.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗乙状结肠癌临床对比分析[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2019,6(22):95-96.
[20]	严铁寰.腹腔镜手术治疗结肠癌的效果及对患者肠道微生态、血清CA125、CEA、CA199水平的影响[J].中国医学创新,2022,19(7):85-89.
[14]	Chen Z Z, Xu S Z, Ding Z J, et al. Comparison between laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for left colorectal cancer: a randomized controlled study with 3-year follow-up results[J]. Zhonghua Wei Chang, 2022,25(7):604-611.
[15]	Liu C, Chu D, Kalantar Z K, et al. Cytokines: from clinical significance to quantification[J]. Adv Sci,2021,8(15):e2004433.
[16]	龙鼎,喻莉,吴晓灵. 全身炎症反应综合征患者血浆D-二聚体与细胞因子动态变化的研究[C]/中华医学会,中华医学会重症医学分会.中华医学会第五次全国重症医学大会论文汇编,2011:571.
[17]	罗浪,王进,曹赛红,等.PCT、CRP、NEU%及WBC在血流感染早期诊断中的应用研究[J/OL].检验医学与临床,1-4[2023-12-07]http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/50.1167.R.20231124.1540.008.html.
[18]	古丽娜尔·哈布赛提.探讨血清降钙素原与白细胞及中性粒细胞对细菌性感染的诊断价值[J].中国农村卫生,2016,1(14):13.
[19]	Zhang Y, Liu C, Nistala K R, et al. Open versus laparoscopic Hartmann’s procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Colorectal Dis,2022,37(12):2421-2430.
[20]	严铁寰.腹腔镜手术治疗结肠癌的效果及对患者肠道微生态、血清CA125、CEA、CA199水平的影响[J].中国医学创新,2022,19(7):85-89.