摘要
目的:探讨内镜黏膜切除术(endoscopic mucosal resection,EMR)及高频电凝圈套切除术治疗结直肠无蒂息肉的有效性及安全性。方法:收集2013年1月至2015年7月108例行EMR治疗(EMR组)或高频电凝圈套切除术治疗(电切组)的结直肠无蒂息肉(直径1~2cm,共131枚)患者的临床资料。对比分析两组患者的手术时长、术后住院时间、手术并发症情况。结果:EMR及高频电凝圈套切除术均成功切除息肉。EMR组手术时长[(9.19±1.32)min]长于电切组[(7.71±1.33)min];EMR组术后平均住院时间[(3.51±2.04)d]短于电切组[(4.63±1.81)d];EMR组术后并发症发生率(5.26%)低于电切组(21.6%),差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。随访期间未见病变残留、原位复发。结论:EMR和高频电凝圈套切除术均可用于直径1~2cm结直肠无蒂息肉的治疗,其中EMR更安全、术后恢复更快。
Objective:To explore the safety and efficacy of endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR)and high frequency electric coagulation electric cut method for treating non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.Methods:During January 2013 and July 2015,the clinical data of 108 patients with 131 non-pedunculated colorectal polyps which the diameter between 1-2 cm were treated by EMR or high frequency electric coagulation electric cut method,operative time,hospital stays and complications were recorded for retrospective analysis.Results:EMR and high frequency electric coagulation electric cut method were successfully performed in all 108 cases.Patients in the EMR group needed longer operative time ([9.19±1.32]min)compared with the snare group ([7.71±1.33]min).The average hospital stay time ([3.51±2.04]d)of patients in the EMR group was shorter compared with that in the snare group ([4.63±1.81]d).EMR group total postoperative complications (5.26%) was lower than the snare group (21.6%,P〈0.05).All polyps were excised,no original residual lesions and recurrenceinsitu were found during follow up.Conclusions:Both EMR and high frequency electric coagulation electric cut method can be used for non-pedunculated colorectal polyps,but EMR is safer and can achieve faster postoperative recovery.
出处
《中国临床医学》
2017年第1期115-118,共4页
Chinese Journal of Clinical Medicine
关键词
结直肠无蒂息肉
内镜黏膜切除术
高频电凝圈套切除术
non-pedunculated colorectal polyps
endoscopic mucosal resection
high frequency electric coagulation electric cut method