传统开腹与腹腔镜治疗的穿孔性阑尾炎的疗效对比分析

Comparative Efficacy Analysis of Traditional Open and Laparoscopic Treatment of Perforated Appendicitis

目的:对比传统开腹与腹腔镜治疗的穿孔性阑尾炎的疗效。方法:选取我院普外科2011年06月至2012年11月收治的穿孔性阑尾炎患者120例,根据治疗方法的不同分为治疗组与对照组各60例,对照组采用传统剖腹阑尾切除术,治疗组采用腹腔镜阑尾切除术。结果:治疗组的术中出血量与切口大小明显少于对照组,不过住院费用明显高于对照组(P<0.05),两组住院时间对比无明显差异(P>0.05)。两组术后切口感染发生率对比无明显差异(P>0.05),两组没有其他严重并发症发生。两组治疗前WBC、N与L水平对比无明显差异,治疗后对照组的WBC与N水平显著升高(P<0.05),组间对比差异明显(P<0.05)。结论:腹腔镜阑尾切除术具备手术时间快、创伤少、切口小等特点,同时安全性好,对于机体的影响小,在治疗穿孔性阑尾炎方面有着广阔的应用前景。

Objective：To compare the efficacy of traditional open and laparoscopic treatment of perforated appendicitis. Methods：Selected 120 patients of perforated appendicitis were treated in our hospital from October 2011 to November 2012, there were equally divided into the treatment group and the control group depending on the treatment, the control group were treated with traditional laparotomy appendectomy, The treatment group were received laparoscopic appendectomy. Results：The blood loss and incision size of the treatment group operative time, operative time, blood loss and incision size were significantly less than the control group, but the cost of hospitalization were significantly higher than that in the control group （P〈0.05）, two groups of hospital stay contrasted had no significant difference （P〉0.05 ）. Postoperative wound infection incidence between the two groups had no significant difference （P〉0.05）, there was no other serious complications. The WBC, N and L level before treatment between the two groups contrasted had no significant difference, and the WBC and N levels after treatment in the control group were significantly higher （P〈0.05）, between the two groups contrasted had also significantly different （P〈0.05）. Conclusion： Laparoscopic appendectomy with fast operation time, less trauma, small incision, and the security is better for the body, it has broad application prospects in the treatment of perforated appendicitis.