圈套器冷切除与活检钳摘除结肠小息肉的疗效比较

Comparison of the clinical efficacy between the cold snare polypectomy and biopsy forceps polypectomy for diminutive colorectal polyp resection

目的探讨并比较圈套器冷切除与活检钳摘除结肠小息肉的疗效。方法选取行乙状结肠单发小息肉(息肉≤5 mm)治疗的患者,将其分为观察组(圈套器冷切除)和对照组(活检钳摘除)。观察2组患者的息肉完全切除率、切除时间及息肉切除后并发症(穿孔、出血)的发生率。结果共120例患者纳入研究,观察组和对照组各60例。观察组的完全切除率为100%,高于对照组的85%(P=0.003)。观察组的息肉切除时间为(74.8±5.4)s,对照组为(72.0±6.7)s,2组比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.014)。观察组和对照组的术后穿孔率均为0%,出血率分别为3%与0%,2组比较差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。结论圈套器和活检钳均能安全有效地治疗结肠小息肉,使用圈套器冷切除的息肉完全切除率明显优于活检钳摘除。

Objective To assess and compare the clinical efficacy between cold snare polypectomy and biopsy forceps polypectomy for the resection of diminutive colorectal polyp. Methods A total of 120 patients with diminutive colorectal polyp（ polyp ≤5 mm） receiving treatment in our hospital were recruited and divided into observation（ cold snare polypectomy,n = 60） and control groups（ biopsy forceps polypectomy,n= 60）. The complete polyp resection rate,resection time,and the incidence of postoperative complications（ perforation and bleeding） were compared between two groups. Results In the observation group,the complete polyp resection rate was 100%,significantly higher compared with 85% in the control group（ P =0. 003）. The resection time in the observation group was（ 74. 8 ± 5. 4） s,significantly longer than（ 72. 0 ± 6. 7）s in the control group（ P = 0. 014）. The postoperative perforation rate was 0% in two groups（ P 〉0. 05）. The incidence rate of bleeding was 3% in the observation group and 0% in the control group with no statistical significance（ P 〉0. 05）. Conclusions Both cold snare and biopsy forceps polypectomy are efficacious and safe treatment of diminutive colorectal polyp. Although the resection time of cold snare polypectomy is longer,the complete polyp resection rate is significantly higher compared with biopsy forceps polypectomy.