临床普外科电子杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (4): 71-.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

不同方法治疗结直肠小息肉的疗效及安全性分析

  

  1. 1. 吉林省肿瘤医院 腹部肿瘤二科,吉林 长春 130012; 2. 吉林省肿瘤医院 胃肠外科,吉林 长春 130012; 3. 吉林省肿瘤医院 内镜科,吉林 长春 130012
  • 出版日期:2022-10-01 发布日期:2023-01-13

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of different methods in the treatment of small colorectal polyps

  1. 1. The Second Abdominal Cancer Department of Jilin Provincial Cancer Hospital, Jilin Changchun 130012, China; 2. Gastrointestinal Surgery Department of Jilin Provincial Cancer Hospital, Jilin Changchun 130012, China;  3. Endoscopy Department of Jilin Cancer Hospital, Jilin Changchun 130012, China
  • Online:2022-10-01 Published:2023-01-13

摘要:

目的 分析不同方案治疗结直肠小息肉患者的价值。方法 筛选2020 年1 月至2021 年1 月吉林省肿瘤医院收治的60 例结直肠小息肉患者,按随机抽样法分为两组(每组30 例)。对照组给予肠镜下热圈套切除术治疗,观察组给予肠镜下冷圈套切除术治疗,对比两组患者的临床疗效、并发症发生情况、手术和恢复情况,以及复发率。结果 观察组患者的临床疗效(96.67%)高于对照组(80.00%),且并发症发生率(6.67%)低于对照组(26.67%),差异均有显著性(P < 0.05)。观察组患者的息肉切除数、息肉直径与对照组无显著差异,但息肉切除时间、肠镜操作时间短于对照组,差异有显著性(P < 0.05)。观察组患者的下地活动时间、住院费用与对照组无显著差异,但住院时间短于对照组,切口大小大于对照组,差异均有显著性(P < 0.05)。结论 较肠镜下热圈套切除术治疗结直肠小息肉,肠镜下冷圈套切除术的安全性、有效性更高,通过缩短切除时间,可促进患者及早下地、出院。

关键词: 肠镜, 冷圈套切除术, 热圈套切除术, 结直肠小息肉, 疗效

Abstract:

Objective To analyze the value of different schemes in the treatment of small colorectal polyps. Method From January 2020 to January 2021, 60 patients with small colorectal polyps admitted to Jilin Cancer Hospital were selected and randomly divided into two groups (30 patients in each group). The control group was treated with hot snare resection under enteroscope, and the observation group was treated with cold snare resection under enteroscope. The clinical efficacy, complications, surgery and recovery, and recurrence rate of the two groups were compared. Result The clinical efficacy of the observation group (96.67%) was higher than that of the control group (80.00%), and the incidence of complications (6.67%) was lower than that of the control group (26.67%), with significant differences (P<0.05). The number of polyps removed and the diameter of polyps in the observation group were not significantly different from those in the control group, but the polyp removal time and colonoscopy

operation time were shorter than those in the control group, with significant differences (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the observation group and the control group in the time of underground activity and hospitalization expenses, but the hospitalization time was shorter than the control group, and the incision size was larger than the control group, with significant differences (P < 0.05). Conclusion Compared with the treatment of small colorectal polyps with hot snare resection under colonoscopy, cold snare resection under colonoscopy is safer and more effective. By shortening the resection time, it can promote patients to go to the ground and leave hospital as soon as possible.

Key words: Enteroscope, Cold snare resection, Heat snare resection, Small colorectal polyps, Curative effect