腹腔镜胆囊切除术和小切口胆囊切除术治疗胆结石疗效对比分析.docVIP

腹腔镜胆囊切除术和小切口胆囊切除术治疗胆结石疗效对比分析 　　[摘要] 目的 对比在治疗胆结石中采取小切口胆囊切除术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床效果。方法 方便选取该院自2016年3月―2017年3月期间收治的110例胆结石患者作为研究样本，采取随机数字表法形式随机分为参照组（n=55）与实验组（n=55），将采取小切口胆囊切除术治疗患者当做参照组，将采取腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗患者作为实验组，分析对比两组胆结石患者经不同手术后的临床效果。结果 实验组患者住院时间、术后排气时间、治疗总有效率98.18%、并发症发生率3.63%等指标显著优于参照组患者（治疗总有效率93.63%、并发症发生率18.18%），组间对比差异有统计学意义（P0.05）。结论 将小切口胆囊切除术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术应用在治疗胆结石中均存在一定效果，但腹腔镜胆囊切除术显著更优，值得临床广泛推广。 　　[关键词] 腹腔镜胆囊切除术；小切口胆囊切除术；胆结石；疗效 　　[中图分类号] R657 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742（2017）10（b）-0057-03 　　[Abstract] Objective This paper tries to compare the clinical effect of small incision cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of gallstones. Methods 110 patients with gallstones from March 2016 to March 2017 were conveniently divided into two groups by random number table， with 55 cases in each group. The control group adopted the small incision cholecystectomy， and the experimental group adopted laparoscopic cholecystectomy， and the clinical effects of two groups of patients with gallstones were compared. Results The total effective rate was 98.18% and the complication rate was 3.63%， and the hospitalized time， postoperative exhaust time in the experimental group were significantly better than those in the control group（the total effective rate was 93.63% and the complication rate was 18.18%）. The difference between the groups were significant， so there was statistically significant difference（P0.05）. Conclusion Small incision cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy have some effect in the treatment of gallstones， but the laparoscopic cholecystectomy is significantly better， which is worthy of clinical promotion. 　　[Key words] Laparoscopic cholecystectomy； Small incision cholecystectomy； Gallstones； Efficacy 　　?结石是外科常见胆道系统疾病，也被叫做胆囊结石，随着人们饮食结构的改变以及生活水平的提升，胆囊结石近年来发病率呈现出逐渐提升的趋势，国内主要类型为胆固醇结石，大约占据胆囊结石发病率的50%[1]。目前临床治疗中最为常用手术措施为小切口切除术，但是并不能获得理想的治疗效果，且术后并发症多，愈合效果差。随着医疗技术以及医学模式的进步与发展，在临床研究中不断应用腹腔镜手术，腹腔镜胆囊切除术是近年来新形成的手术技术，具备创伤小、恢复快、出血量少、疗效显著、安全性高、痛苦少等优势，值得应用。现对该