Savary-Gilliard扩张器扩张和电化学治疗食管癌术后吻合口狭窄的临床研究

Clinical Research of Savary-Gilliard Dilator and Electrochemical in the Treatment of Anastomotic Stricture after Esophageal Cancer Operation

目的:探讨Savary-Gilliard扩张器扩张和电化学治疗食管癌术后吻合口狭窄的临床应用价值。方法:选择2010年1月-2011年1月本院收治的76例食管癌术后吻合口狭窄的患者,采用随机数字表法将其分为观察组和对照组各38例,观察组应用Savary-Gilliard扩张器扩张治疗,对照组采用电化学治疗方法,对所有患者进行3年的随访,对比两组临床治疗效果、安全性及并发症发生情况。结果:观察组总有效率为94.7%显著优于对照组的84.2%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组并发症发生率为0%显著低于对照组13.2%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);随访3年,两组生存率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:Savary-Gilliard扩张器扩张治疗较电化学治疗食管癌术后吻合口狭窄效果好、安全性高、并发症发生率较低,值得在临床推广。

Objective： To investigate the value of the clinical application of Savary-Gilliard dilator and electrochemical therapy in the treatment of anastomotic stricture after operation of esophageal cancer. Methods： 76 cases of patients with esophageal anastomotic after esophageal cancer operation chosen from January 2010 to January 2011 in our hospital using random digits table were divided into the observation group, which were given Savary-Gilliard dilator therapy, and the control group which were treated with electrochemical therapy, and 30 cases were in each group. All patients were followed up for three years, and the clinical outcomes, safety and complications of the two groups were compared. Results： The total effective rate of observation group was 94.7%, significantly higher than that （84.2%）in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）; complication rate of observation group was 0%, significantly lower than in the control group （13.2%）, and the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）; According to three years of follow-up, the difference in survival rate between the two groups was not statistically significant （P〉0.05）. Conclusion： Savary-Gilliard dilator therapy, with safety and low rate of complications, presents better effect than the electrochemical therapy in treatment of esophageal anastomotic stricturehas, so it is worth clinical promotion.