单孔与单操作孔胸腔镜治疗自发性气胸的对比研究

摘要

目的 比较单孔胸腔镜手术(uniportal VATS)与单操作孔胸腔镜手术(single utility port VATS)治疗自发性气胸的疗效.方法 回顾性收集2013年1月-2015年12月收治自发性气胸行uniportal VATS治疗的53例患者作为实验组,对照同期53例行single utility port VATS治疗的患者作为对照组,比较两组的手术时间、术中出血量、胸管放置时间、术后住院时间、术后疼痛、术后并发症及远期复发等临床指标.结果 106例患者均顺利完成手术,无死亡及严重并发症发生.实验组和对照组比较,术后24 h疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)为(2.60±0.71)vs(3.38±0.84),术后72 h VAS为(1.30±0.51)vs(1.58±0.62),实验组较对照组术后24和72 h疼痛减轻(P<0.05).两组患者手术时间、术中出血、胸管引流时间、术后住院时间、手术费用和术后并发症的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).随访时间5~36个月,平均19个月,术后无气胸复发.结论 单孔胸腔镜治疗自发性气胸与单操作孔两种方法同样安全有效,但单孔法术后疼痛程度更轻,近期疗效满意,值得进一步临床推广.%Objective To compare the efficacy of uniportal VATS and single utility port VATS in treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax.Method From January 2013 to December 2015, we retrospectively collected clinical data of 53 patients with spontaneous pneumothorax who were treated with uniportal VATS, as study group; compared with control group: 53 patients received single utility port VATS in the same period. The clinical data was compared between the two groups, including the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, drainage time, postoperative extubation time, postoperative pain score, postoperative hospitalization and recurrence.Results All patients were successfully completed the operation, no death and serious complications occurred. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood lose, duration of chest drainage, duration of hospital stay and incidence of serious postoperative complications between two groups (P > 0.05). Mean Visual Analogic Scale (VAS) score for 24 h post-operative pain was: (2.60 ± 0.71) for uniportal VATS and (3.38 ± 0.84) for single utility port VATS (P > 0.05), 72 h post-operative pain was: (1.30 ± 0.51) for uniportal VATS and (1.58 ± 0.62) for single utility port VATS (P > 0.05). Follow up 5 ~ 36 months, median follow up was 19 months. No recurrence occurred during follow up.Conclusions The study suggested that both surgical approaches to spontaneous pneumothorax are safe and effective. Significant differences were found for early post-operative pain between the two approaches, the uniportal way is better. It is worthy of clinical promoting.