加速康復外科在開腹大肝癌切除病例中的應用與研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-10-21 17:30
【摘要】：目的:本次研究將探討與評價圍手術期擬用ERAS程序在開腹大肝癌切除術病例中是否具有可行性、有效性及安全性。方法:選取西南醫(yī)科大學附屬醫(yī)院2014年08月01日~2017年04月01日在我院行大肝癌切除術的患者為研究對象,總共101例,男性58例,女性43例,并將患者隨機分為ERAS組與傳統(tǒng)圍手術期管理組,ERAS組圍手術期采取加速康復理念指導下的優(yōu)化處理方案,對照組圍手術期采取傳統(tǒng)的處理方案,兩組患者都以共同的出院標準。就兩組患者圍手術期應激指標變化情況、達到出院標準的時間、術后患者住院時間、術后患者的疼痛VAS評分、術后患者胃腸道功能恢復情況、術后患者留置鼻胃管時間、術后患者留置腹腔引流管時間、術后相關并發(fā)癥等做出比較分析。結果:(1)基本資料:兩組患者在年齡、性別、體重、身高、BMI、術前血紅蛋白、術前ALT、術前AST、術前ASA分級、術前ECOG評分、術前BCLC分級、術前肝功能Child-pugh分級差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(2)術中肝葉切除術的類型:兩組患者術中肝葉切除術的類型差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(3)術前評估中,ERAS組患者饑餓、口渴感發(fā)生率明顯低于傳統(tǒng)圍手術期管理組,(P值0.001);ERAS組患者恐慌、焦慮感發(fā)生率低于傳統(tǒng)圍手術期管理組,具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P值0.05)。(4)兩組患者在手術所需時間、術中出血量的多少、術中第一肝門阻斷時間、術中有無輸血方面差異無統(tǒng)計學意義。(5)術后相關應激指標:ERAS組術后第1、3、5天CRP水平明顯低于傳統(tǒng)治療組,兩組間差異具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05);兩組患者在術后IL-6、白細胞、血糖方面無統(tǒng)汁學差異(P0.05)。(6)術后疼痛感:術前及術后第5天VAS評分兩組間差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),加速康復組術后當天以及術后第1,3天VAS評分明顯低于傳統(tǒng)管理組,兩組間差異具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(7)術后拔管時間:ERAS組患者術后鼻胃管、導尿管、腹腔引流管拔除時間明顯短于傳統(tǒng)管理組,兩組間差異具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(8)術后康復:ERAS組患者術后開始進食時間、術后下床活動時間、術后肛門排氣時間、術后肛門排便時間明顯短于傳統(tǒng)治療組,兩組間差異具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(9)術后90天內并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率與再入院率:術后相關并發(fā)癥以Dindo-Clavien分類法進行分級,ERAS組與傳統(tǒng)治療組患者術后90天內并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率及再入院率兩組間差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。(10)TRD以及術后住院日,總住院費用:ERAS組患者在TRD、術后住院日明顯短于傳統(tǒng)治療組,兩組間差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05),ERAS組總住院費用明顯少于傳統(tǒng)治療組,兩組間差異具有統(tǒng)計學意義(P0.05)。結論:ERAS理念應用于大肝癌切除術病例中能夠加速康復進程,減輕術后應激反應,縮短住院時間,減少住院費用,然而ERAS組與傳統(tǒng)管理組在控制術后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率方面無明顯差異;總之,圍手術期擬用ERAS程序在大肝癌切除術病例中具有可行性、有效性及安全性。
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate and evaluate the feasibility, efficacy and safety of perioperative ERAS program in patients with large open liver cancer. Methods: 101 patients (58 males and 43 females) who underwent hepatectomy in our hospital from 01 August 2014 to 01 April 2017 in the affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University were selected. The patients were randomly divided into ERAS group and traditional perioperative management group. The ERAS group adopted the optimized treatment plan under the guidance of the idea of accelerated rehabilitation during the perioperative period, and the control group adopted the traditional treatment plan during the perioperative period. The two groups of patients were discharged to the same standard. According to the changes of stress index in perioperative period, the time of discharge, the time of hospitalization, the VAS score of postoperative pain, the recovery of gastrointestinal tract function, the time of keeping nasogastric tube. The time of indwelling celiac drainage tube and postoperative complications were compared and analyzed. Results: (1) basic data: age, sex, weight, height, hemoglobin before BMI, preoperative ASA grade before ALT, ECOG score before operation, BCLC grade before operation in both groups. There was no significant difference in preoperative Child-pugh grade of liver function (P0.05). (2). There was no significant difference in the type of intraoperative hepatectomy between the two groups (P0.05). (3). In the preoperative evaluation, the patients in the ERAS group were hungry. The incidence of thirst was significantly lower than that of the traditional perioperative management group (, (P value 0.001); ERAS), and the incidence of anxiety was lower than that of the traditional perioperative management group (P0. 05). (4). There was no significant difference in the first hepatic portal occlusion time and blood transfusion during the operation. (5) postoperative stress index: the level of CRP in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the traditional treatment group on the 1st day, 3th day after operation, and 5 days after operation. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). There was no significant difference in blood glucose between the two groups (P0.05). (6): there was no significant difference in VAS score between the two groups before and after 5 days (P0.05). The VAS score in the accelerated rehabilitation group was significantly lower than that in the traditional management group on the postoperative day and the 1st day after the operation (P0.05). There was significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). (7) postoperative extubation time: ERAS group patients after nasal and gastric tube, catheter, abdominal drainage tube extraction time was significantly shorter than the traditional management group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). (8) postoperative rehabilitation: the ERAS group patients began to eat time after surgery, the time to get out of bed, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative anal defecation time was significantly shorter than the traditional treatment group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). (9) the incidence of complications within 90 days after operation and readmission rate: the postoperative complications were classified by Dindo-Clavien classification, and the incidence of complications and re-entry in the ERAS group and the traditional treatment group within 90 days after operation. There was no significant difference in hospital rate between the two groups (P0.05). (10) TRD and postoperative hospitalization days. Total hospitalization cost: the hospitalization days of ERAS group were significantly shorter than that of the traditional treatment group after TRD, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). The total hospitalization cost of the), ERAS group was significantly lower than that of the traditional treatment group (P0.05). Conclusion: the idea of ERAS can accelerate the rehabilitation process, reduce the stress response, shorten the hospitalization time and reduce the hospitalization cost in patients with large liver cancer. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the ERAS group and the traditional management group. In short, the perioperative ERAS procedure was feasible, effective and safe in patients with large liver cancer.
【學位授予單位】：西南醫(yī)科大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R735.7
本文編號：2285837
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate and evaluate the feasibility, efficacy and safety of perioperative ERAS program in patients with large open liver cancer. Methods: 101 patients (58 males and 43 females) who underwent hepatectomy in our hospital from 01 August 2014 to 01 April 2017 in the affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University were selected. The patients were randomly divided into ERAS group and traditional perioperative management group. The ERAS group adopted the optimized treatment plan under the guidance of the idea of accelerated rehabilitation during the perioperative period, and the control group adopted the traditional treatment plan during the perioperative period. The two groups of patients were discharged to the same standard. According to the changes of stress index in perioperative period, the time of discharge, the time of hospitalization, the VAS score of postoperative pain, the recovery of gastrointestinal tract function, the time of keeping nasogastric tube. The time of indwelling celiac drainage tube and postoperative complications were compared and analyzed. Results: (1) basic data: age, sex, weight, height, hemoglobin before BMI, preoperative ASA grade before ALT, ECOG score before operation, BCLC grade before operation in both groups. There was no significant difference in preoperative Child-pugh grade of liver function (P0.05). (2). There was no significant difference in the type of intraoperative hepatectomy between the two groups (P0.05). (3). In the preoperative evaluation, the patients in the ERAS group were hungry. The incidence of thirst was significantly lower than that of the traditional perioperative management group (, (P value 0.001); ERAS), and the incidence of anxiety was lower than that of the traditional perioperative management group (P0. 05). (4). There was no significant difference in the first hepatic portal occlusion time and blood transfusion during the operation. (5) postoperative stress index: the level of CRP in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the traditional treatment group on the 1st day, 3th day after operation, and 5 days after operation. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). There was no significant difference in blood glucose between the two groups (P0.05). (6): there was no significant difference in VAS score between the two groups before and after 5 days (P0.05). The VAS score in the accelerated rehabilitation group was significantly lower than that in the traditional management group on the postoperative day and the 1st day after the operation (P0.05). There was significant difference between the two groups (P0.05). (7) postoperative extubation time: ERAS group patients after nasal and gastric tube, catheter, abdominal drainage tube extraction time was significantly shorter than the traditional management group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). (8) postoperative rehabilitation: the ERAS group patients began to eat time after surgery, the time to get out of bed, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative anal defecation time was significantly shorter than the traditional treatment group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). (9) the incidence of complications within 90 days after operation and readmission rate: the postoperative complications were classified by Dindo-Clavien classification, and the incidence of complications and re-entry in the ERAS group and the traditional treatment group within 90 days after operation. There was no significant difference in hospital rate between the two groups (P0.05). (10) TRD and postoperative hospitalization days. Total hospitalization cost: the hospitalization days of ERAS group were significantly shorter than that of the traditional treatment group after TRD, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P0.05). The total hospitalization cost of the), ERAS group was significantly lower than that of the traditional treatment group (P0.05). Conclusion: the idea of ERAS can accelerate the rehabilitation process, reduce the stress response, shorten the hospitalization time and reduce the hospitalization cost in patients with large liver cancer. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the ERAS group and the traditional management group. In short, the perioperative ERAS procedure was feasible, effective and safe in patients with large liver cancer.
【學位授予單位】：西南醫(yī)科大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R735.7
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前5條
1 孫政;古維立;曹杰;;加速康復外科應用的現(xiàn)狀及展望[J];廣東醫(yī)學;2016年18期
2 黎介壽;江志偉;;加速康復外科的臨床意義不僅僅是縮短住院日[J];中華消化外科雜志;2015年01期
3 Belinda Sánchez-Pérez;José Manuel Aranda-Narváez;Miguel Angel Suárez-Muoz;Moises elAdel-delFresno;José Luis Fernández-Aguilar;Jose Antonio Pérez-Daga;Ysabel Pulido-Roa;Julio Santoyo-Santoyo;;Fast-track program in laparoscopic liver surgery:Theory or fact?[J];World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery;2012年11期
4 Alison Lyon;Christopher J Payne;Graham J MacKay;;Enhanced recovery programme in colorectal surgery:Does one size fit all?[J];World Journal of Gastroenterology;2012年40期
5 孫備;宋增福;姜洪池;;快速康復在胰腺外科中應用的現(xiàn)狀與爭論[J];中國實用外科雜志;2011年10期
，本文編號：2285837
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/yixuelunwen/zlx/2285837.html
最近更新
教材專著
