目的 比较单孔法与三孔法电视胸腔镜手术治疗肺大疱的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析本院行肺大疱106例电视胸腔镜手术治疗情况,其中行单孔法切除术51例称单孔法组,行三孔法切除术55例称三孔法组,对两组的手术时间、切口总长度、术中出血量、术后胸管引流总量、胸管留置时间、术后住院时间、住院费用、术后疼痛程度等指标进行对比。结果 所有患者均手术成功,两组手术时间、术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义;单孔法组较三孔法组手术切口总长度小[(4.1±0.4)cm vs(4.9±0.5) cm],术后胸管引流总量减少[(186±79)ml vs(219±80)ml],胸管留置时间缩短[(2.3±1.6) d vs(2.9±1.6)d],术后疼痛程度比对照组轻,差异均具有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论 与传统的三孔法相比,单孔法有利于减轻疼痛、提高患者生活质量。
Abstract
Objective To study the feasibility and clinical value of single utility port complete video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) to treat pulmonary bulla. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 106 pulmonary bulla patients treated with VATS. 51 patients received single utility port complete VATS (single-port group) and 55 patients received three port VATS (three-port group). The operation time, wound size, blood loss, post-operative drainage time and volume, post-operative hospital stay and assessment of pain between two groups were compared. Results All the patients underwent thoracic operation successfully, there was no statistically significant difference in operation time and blood lost between the two groups; Compared with control group, the length of the incision in observation group was shorter [(4.1±0.39)cm vs (4.9±0.46) cm], the tube drainage was less[(186±79)ml vs(219±80)ml], and the thoracic tube sustain less longer[(2.3±1.6) d vs(2.9±1.6)d]. The post-operative pain level compared with the control group was statistically significant. Conclusions The single utility port complete VATS is feasible in the treatment of pulmonary bulla and can improve the quality of life for patients.
关键词
肺大疱 /
电视胸腔镜手术 /
单孔法
Key words
pulmonary bulla /
video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery /
single utility port
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 孙玉鹗.单操作孔胸腔镜肺叶切除术[J].中国肺癌杂志,2010,13(1):21.
[2] 车国卫,刘伦旭.单孔电视胸腔镜手术临床应用的现状与进展[J].中国胸心血管外科临床杂志,2012,19(2):181-184.
[3] Berlanga L A,Gigirey O.Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for primary spontaneous pneumothorax using a single-incision laparoscopic surgeryport:a feasible and safe procedure[J].Surg Endosc,2011,25(6):2044-2047.
[4] Best S L,Tracy C R,Cadeddu J A.Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery:future perspectives[J].BJU Int,2010,106(6):941-944.
[5] Khanna R,Autorino R,White M A,et al. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery:current clinical experience[J].BJU Int,2010,106(6):897-902.
[6] Autorino R,Stein R J,Lima E,et al.Current status and future perspectives in laparoendoscopic single-site and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic urological surgery[J].Int J Urol,2010,17:410-431.
[7] Migliore M.Efficacy and safety of single-trocar technique for minimally invasive surgery of the chest in the treatment of noncomplex pleural disease[J].Thorac Cardiovase Surg,2003,126(5):1618-1623.
[8] Chang A C.Awake single-access (uniportal) video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for peripheral pulmonary nodules in a complete ambulatory setting[J].Ann Thorac Surg,2010,89(5):1625-1626.
[9] 徐大华. 单孔腹腔镜手术的技术瓶颈分析[J].中国微创外科杂志,2010,10(1):21-22.
[10] Chen P R,Chen C K,Lin Y S,et al.single-incision thoracoscopic surgery for primary spontaneous pneumothorax[J].J Cardiothorac Surg,2011,6:58.
[11] Gonzalez-Rivas D,Torre M,Fernandez R,et al. Single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic left upper lobectomy[J].Inter Cardiovasc Thorac Surg,2011,13(5):539-541.
[12] Salati M,Brunelli A,Xiumè F,et al.Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for primary spontaneous pneumothorax:clinical and economic analysis in comparison to the traditional approach[J].Inter Cardiovasc Thorac Surg,2008,7(1):63-66.
PDF(574 KB)
