食道癌采用不同术式治疗的临床效果观察

The clinical effect of different surgical treatment for esophageal cancer

目的研究不同术式在食道癌中的应用价值。方法本院2016年2月～2017年10月接诊的40例食道癌患者,根据奇偶数字分组法将之进行分组:试验和对照两组均20例。对试验组实行胸腔镜辅助食管癌根治术治疗,对对照组实行传统三切口食管癌根治术治疗。综合分析两组的手术治疗效果,比较术中出血量和术后生活质量评分等指标。结果试验组并发症发生率比对照组低,两者之比为:5.0%vs25.0%(P<0.05)。试验组手术时间与术中出血量明显优于对照组短(P<0.05)。试验组的住院时间为(8.12±0.56)d,比对照组的(10.04±0.51)d明显缩短(P<0.05)。试验组的术后QLQ-C30评分为(87.51±4.96)分,明显低于对照组(70.25±5.84)分(P<0.05)。结论选择胸腔镜辅助食管癌根治术对食道癌病患进行施治,可有效减少并发症发生风险,减少手术创伤,缩短手术用时,促进术后病情恢复。

Objective To study the application of different surgical methods in esophageal carcinoma. Methods 40 cases of esophageal cancer treated in our hospital from February 2016 to October 2017 were divided into two groups according to the qi and even digital grouping method： the test and control group were both 20. The radical operation of thoracoscopic assisted esophageal carcinoma was performed in the experimental group, and the traditional three incision esophageal cancer radical treatment was performed in the control group. The efficacy of the two groups was analyzed, and the blood volume and postoperative quality of life were compared. Results The complication rate of the experimental group was lower than that of the control group,and the ratio was 5.0% vs 25.0%（P〈0.05）. The duration of operation and intraoperative blood loss were significantly better than that in the control group（P〈0.05）. The length of hospitalization in the experimental group was （8.12± 0.56） d, significantly shorter than that in the control group （10.04 ±0.51）（P〈0.05）. The postoperative q1q-c30 score of the experimental group was （87.51 ±4.96）, significantly lower than that in the control group （70.25 ± 5.84）（P〈0.05）. Conclusion Thoracoscope assisted radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer patients can effectively reduce the risk of complications, reduce surgical trauma, shorten operative time and promote postoperative recovery.