论文部分内容阅读
[目的]探讨直肠癌Dixon术后经骶前腹膜外引流和经骶前会阴引流的临床价值。[方法]对256例行Dixon手术的直肠癌患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,比较两种不同引流方法的疗效差别。[结果]患者术前一般资料,术后引流物情况以及腹部切口感染率、吻合口出血率、吻合口瘘发生率等近期并发症两组比较无差别(P﹥0.05),但在患者术后引流管外周组织的局部情况、引流管切口和盆腔感染率方面,两组比较差别均具有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。[结论]直肠癌Dixon术后经骶前腹膜外引流优于经骶前会阴引流,前者可以减少术后并发症、减轻病人痛苦、缩短住院时间,在没有经腹膜引流禁忌症情况下可作为直肠癌Dixon术后的首要骶前引流方式。
[Objective] To investigate the clinical value of Dixon rectal drainage after presacral extraperitoneal drainage and presacral perineal drainage. [Methods] The clinical data of 256 patients with rectal cancer undergoing Dixon surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The difference in efficacy between the two different drainage methods was compared. [Results] There was no difference between the two groups (P> 0.05), but there was no difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of general information, postoperative drainage, infection rate of abdominal incision, bleeding rate of anastomosis, incidence of anastomotic fistula, There were significant differences between the two groups (P <0.05) in terms of the local situation of the peripheral tissue of the drainage tube, drainage tube incision and pelvic infection rate. [Conclusion] Dixon after rectal cancer is superior to presacral perineal drainage through presacral extraperitoneal drainage, the former can reduce postoperative complications, reduce patient pain and shorten the hospital stay, and can be used as rectum without peritoneal drainage contraindications Dixon cancer after the primary presacral drainage.