论文部分内容阅读
目的比较下颌骨舌侧松解进路与传统下唇裂开进路治疗口腔癌的临床疗效。方法选取2010年6月至2015年6月间收治的60例口腔癌患者,采取随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组30例。观察组患者接受下颌骨舌侧松解进路治疗,对照组患者接受传统下唇裂开进路治疗,比较两组患者并发症发生率、肿瘤局部控制率、生存率、进食及语言功能恢复情况。结果两组患者的并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者的3、5年肿瘤控制率和3、5年生存率的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。两组患者的进食功能中,善食、半流食、流食和鼻饲所占比例差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);语言功能中,能听清楚、基本能听清楚及听不清楚所占比例的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论下颌骨舌侧松解进路治疗口腔癌的疗效与下唇裂开进路比较,临床疗效相似,但未增加并发症发生率,进食及语言功能得到缓解,值得推广。
Objective To compare the clinical curative effect of lingual loosening of mandible and traditional lower cleft lip in the treatment of oral cancer. Methods Sixty patients with oral cancer who were admitted between June 2010 and June 2015 were randomly divided into observation group and control group, with 30 cases in each group. Patients in the observation group received treatment of lingual release of the mandible. Patients in the control group underwent traditional lower cleft palate approach. Complications, tumor local control rates, survival rates, food and speech function recovery were compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in complication rates between the two groups (P> 0.05). There were no significant differences in the rates of 3 and 5 years tumor control and 3 and 5 years survival between the two groups (all P> 0.05). There was no significant difference in the proportion of eating good food, half-flowing food, liquid food and nasal feeding between the two groups (all P> 0.05). In the language function, they could hear clearly, basically could not hear clearly There was no significant difference in proportion (all P> 0.05). Conclusions The curative effect of lingual approach to the treatment of oral cancer in the mandible is similar to that of the lower lip in the approach of cleft lip. The clinical curative effect is similar, but the incidence of complications is not increased, and the eating and language functions are alleviated and it is worth popularizing.