腹腔镜广泛全子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌的效果观察
|
摘要
目的:观察腹腔镜广泛全子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌患者的效果。方法:选取宫颈癌患者104例,采用随机数字表法将其分为对照组和观察组各52例。对照组患者进行传统开腹广泛全子宫切除术治疗,观察组患者进行腹腔镜广泛全子宫切除术治疗,书中两组均行盆腔淋巴结清扫治疗。比较两组患者的手术情况(淋巴结切除数量、手术时间、术中出血量、输血率)、术后恢复情况(肛门通气时间、留置尿管时间、住院时间)及并发症发生情况。结果:两组的淋巴结切除数量比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),观察组的术中出血量、输血率均明显小于对照组,手术时间、肛门通气时间、留置尿管时间、住院时间均明显短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组并发症发生率为7.69%,明显低于对照组的38.46%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:腹腔镜广泛子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌的效果优于传统开腹广泛全子宫切除术的治疗效果。
Objective: To observe therapeutic effects of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy on patients with cervical cancer. Methods:104 patients with cervical cancer were selected and divided into control group and observation group by using the random number table method,52 cases in each group. The control group underwent radical hysterectomy with conventional open surgery, while the observation group was giventhe laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. Besides, the two groups underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy. The operation status(number of lymph nodedissected, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and blood transfusion rate), postoperative recovery(anal ventilation time, indwelling catheter time,hospitalization time) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference in the number of lymphnode dissected between the two groups(P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion rate were significantly lower in the observationgroup than the control group; the operation time, anal ventilation time, indwelling catheter time, and hospitalization time were significantly shorterthan those of the control group; and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05). The complication rate of the observation group was7.69%, which was significantly lower than that of the control group(38.46%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusions:Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in the treatment of the patients with cervical cancer is superior to conventional open radical hysterectomy.
Objective: To observe therapeutic effects of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy on patients with cervical cancer. Methods:104 patients with cervical cancer were selected and divided into control group and observation group by using the random number table method,52 cases in each group. The control group underwent radical hysterectomy with conventional open surgery, while the observation group was giventhe laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. Besides, the two groups underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy. The operation status(number of lymph nodedissected, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and blood transfusion rate), postoperative recovery(anal ventilation time, indwelling catheter time,hospitalization time) and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference in the number of lymphnode dissected between the two groups(P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion rate were significantly lower in the observationgroup than the control group; the operation time, anal ventilation time, indwelling catheter time, and hospitalization time were significantly shorterthan those of the control group; and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05). The complication rate of the observation group was7.69%, which was significantly lower than that of the control group(38.46%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusions:Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in the treatment of the patients with cervical cancer is superior to conventional open radical hysterectomy.
引文
[1]于鹃鹏,秦珊珊,南燕.腹腔镜广泛子宫切除结合盆腔淋巴结清扫治疗宫颈癌的疗效观察[J].医学临床研究,2017,34(8):1558-1560.
[2]陈光元,黄平,谢家滨,等.腹腔镜广泛子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗宫颈癌疗效观察[J].海南医学,2016,27(6):932-934.
[3]王慧珍,吴暖暖.多烯紫杉醇化疗方案辅助宫颈癌根治术+盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗早期宫颈癌的效果[J].医学综述,2016,22(17):3458-3461.
[4]丰有吉,沈铿.妇产科学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2005:318-320.
[5]朱静芳.老年宫颈癌患者行腹腔镜下广泛子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴结清扫术的临床效果观察[J].实用癌症杂志,2016,31(11):1822-1824.
[6]谈宗国.腹腔镜广泛子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴结切除术治疗子宫颈癌的疗效分析[J].实用癌症杂志,2016,31(9):1487-1489.
[7]吴科,李雨聪,唐郢.腹腔镜根治性子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴清扫术后是否放置引流对盆腔淋巴囊肿的影响[J].中国微创外科杂志,2016,16(12):1089-1091.
[8]汪军坚,王春兰,张婉平,等.腹腔镜手术治疗宫颈癌患者术后生命质量分析[J].中国内镜杂志,2016,22(6):31-34.
[9]褚超男,薛敏. 108例早期宫颈癌根治术的腹腔镜与经腹术式比较研究[J].中国妇幼健康研究,2016,27(4):503-505.
[10]蔡颖,张顺仓,王建锋,等.腹腔镜与经腹宫颈癌根治术320例临床分析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2016,8(4):50-52.
[2]陈光元,黄平,谢家滨,等.腹腔镜广泛子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗宫颈癌疗效观察[J].海南医学,2016,27(6):932-934.
[3]王慧珍,吴暖暖.多烯紫杉醇化疗方案辅助宫颈癌根治术+盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗早期宫颈癌的效果[J].医学综述,2016,22(17):3458-3461.
[4]丰有吉,沈铿.妇产科学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2005:318-320.
[5]朱静芳.老年宫颈癌患者行腹腔镜下广泛子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴结清扫术的临床效果观察[J].实用癌症杂志,2016,31(11):1822-1824.
[6]谈宗国.腹腔镜广泛子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴结切除术治疗子宫颈癌的疗效分析[J].实用癌症杂志,2016,31(9):1487-1489.
[7]吴科,李雨聪,唐郢.腹腔镜根治性子宫切除联合盆腔淋巴清扫术后是否放置引流对盆腔淋巴囊肿的影响[J].中国微创外科杂志,2016,16(12):1089-1091.
[8]汪军坚,王春兰,张婉平,等.腹腔镜手术治疗宫颈癌患者术后生命质量分析[J].中国内镜杂志,2016,22(6):31-34.
[9]褚超男,薛敏. 108例早期宫颈癌根治术的腹腔镜与经腹术式比较研究[J].中国妇幼健康研究,2016,27(4):503-505.
[10]蔡颖,张顺仓,王建锋,等.腹腔镜与经腹宫颈癌根治术320例临床分析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2016,8(4):50-52.