论文部分内容阅读
[目的]探讨食管癌三野淋巴结清扫术食管胃颈部吻合口机械吻合对术后吻合口并发症影响情况。[方法]选取2002年2月~2014年11月我院收治82例食管癌患者随机分为观察组和对照组,2组患者术后颈部分别采用机械吻合和人工吻合,比较2组吻合时间、吻合费用及吻合口瘘和吻合口狭窄发生情况。[结果]观察组吻合时间明显短于对照组[(15.1±4.6)min(29.4±4.3)min,P<0.05];观察组吻合费用明显高于对照组[(3698.6±356.1)元(325.5±22.8)元,P<0.05]。观察组吻合口瘘发生率为2.44%,对照组发生率为7.32%,2组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组吻合口狭窄发生率为19.51%明显高于对照组2.44%,比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。[结论]食管癌三野淋巴结清扫术食管胃机械吻合相比人工吻合操作简单、吻合效果显著,但可增加吻合费用,提高吻合口狭窄发生率,临床中应根据具体情况进行吻合方式选择,以获得最佳吻合效果。
[Objective] To investigate the effect of esophageal-gastric anastomosis mechanical anastomosis on esophagogastric anastomotic complications after esophagectomy. [Methods] 82 patients with esophageal cancer treated in our hospital from February 2002 to November 2014 were randomly divided into observation group and control group. The neck of the two groups were treated by mechanical anastomosis and artificial anastomosis. The anastomotic time , Consistent with the cost and anastomotic leakage and anastomotic stenosis occurred. [Results] The anastomosis time in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group [(15.1 ± 4.6) min (29.4 ± 4.3) min, P <0.05]. The anastomosis cost in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group [(3698.6 ± 356.1) 325.5 ± 22.8) yuan, P <0.05]. The incidence of anastomotic leakage was 2.44% in the observation group and 7.32% in the control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). The incidence of anastomotic stenosis in observation group was 19.51%, which was significantly higher than that in control group (2.44%) (P <0.05). [Conclusion] esophageal cancer three-node lymphadenectomy esophagogastric mechanical anastomosis compared to manual operation is simple, significant anastomosis, but can increase the cost of anastomosis and improve the incidence of anastomotic stenosis, clinical should be based on the specific circumstances of anastomosis to obtain Best match effect.