论文部分内容阅读
目的比较开腹结直肠癌根治手术中使用超声刀与电刀的临床效果。方法将同期收治的结直肠癌患者随机分成使用超声刀(30例)与电刀(32例)行根治术两组,比较两种方法的效果。结果超声刀组和电刀组平均切口长度分别为(6±2)cm和(15±4)cm,平均术中出血量分别为(50±6)mL和(150±30)mL,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。超声刀组和电刀组手术时间分别为(130±25)min和(145±30)min,淋巴结清扫数目分别为(13±6)个和(12±5)个,两者无统计学差异(均P>0.05);超声刀组术后镇痛时间、肛门排气时间、住院时间与引流量优于电刀组(均P<0.05),术后并发症两组无差异(均P>0.05)。结论开放结直肠癌根治手术中使用超声刀较使用电刀具有损伤小,术后恢复快等优点。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of ultrasonic knife and electric knife in radical surgery of open colorectal cancer. Methods Patients with colorectal cancer who were treated at the same period were randomly divided into two groups: radical scalpel (30 cases) and electric knife (32 cases). The effects of the two methods were compared. Results The mean incision length of the ultrasonic knife group and the electric knife group were (6 ± 2) cm and (15 ± 4) cm, respectively. The mean intraoperative blood loss was (50 ± 6) mL and (150 ± 30) mL respectively There was statistical significance (all P <0.05). The operative time was (130 ± 25) min and (145 ± 30) min in the ultrasonic knife group and the electric knife group respectively, and the number of lymph node dissection was (13 ± 6) and (12 ± 5) respectively, with no significant difference (All P> 0.05). The postoperative analgesia time, anal exhaust time, hospitalization time and drainage volume in ultrasonic knife group were superior to those in electric knife group (all P <0.05). There was no difference in postoperative complications between the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusions The use of ultrasonic blade in the radical operation of open colorectal cancer has the advantages of less damage and quicker recovery after using the electric knife.