圈套器冷切除术和内镜下黏膜切除术治疗结肠息肉的效果比较

Colonic Polyps Surgically Treated with Cold Snare Polypectomy,and with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection:Efficacy Comparison

目的:观察比较圈套器冷切除术(CSP)和内镜下黏膜切除术(EMR)治疗结肠息肉的效果。方法:将96例结肠息肉患者,根据手术方式进行分组,将行CSP治疗的48例结肠息肉患者(119个息肉)设为观察组,将行EMR治疗的48例结肠息肉患者(121个息肉)设为对照组,比较2组患者息肉切除时间、手术时间、住院时间、术后1个月息肉治愈率、术后6个月息肉复发率及术后并发症发生率。结果:观察组患者息肉切除时间、手术时间均短于对照组(P<0.05),2组患者住院时间、术后1个月息肉治愈率及术后6个月复发率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),2组患者并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:CSP、EMR治疗结肠息肉患者其住院时间、息肉治愈率、复发率及并发症发生率无较大差异,但CSP息肉切除时间及手术时间均短于EMR。

Objective To observe and compare the efficacy of colonic polyps surgically treated with cold snare polypectomy(CSP),and with endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR).Methods According to their procedures divided 96 patients with colonic polyps treated in author’s hospital into observation group(48 cases,totalled 119 piece of polyps,received CSP)and control group(48 cases,totalled 121 piece of polyps,received EMR);then,compared the time for polyps resected,for operating,for hospitalization;the curative rate of polyps at 1 month after surgery;the recurrence rate of polyps at 6 months after surgery;as well as the incidence of postoperative complication between the two groups.Results In hospitalization time,in the curative rate of polyps at 1 month after surgery.in the recurrence rate at 6 months after surgery,as well as in complication incidence there was all no statistical difference between the two groups(all,P<0.05);Only,in the time for polyps resected,and for operating observation group was shorter than control group(P<0.05).Conclusion For colonic polyps,both procedures don’t have large difference in hospitalization time,curative rate of polyps,recurrence rate and complication incidence,etc,only in the time for polyps resected,and for operating CSP is superior to ERM.