腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术与开腹根治性子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌疗效比较

摘要

目的：比较腹腔镜根治性子宫切除术（LRH）与开腹根治性子宫切除术（RAH）治疗宫颈癌的疗效。方法回顾性分析2012年1月至2013年7月在该院行LRH的63例（腹腔镜组）宫颈癌患者的临床资料，选取同期行RAH的74例（开腹组）宫颈癌患者作为对照，观察两组手术时间、术中出血量、切除淋巴结数目、切除阴道长度、切除主骶韧带长度、术后切口愈合情况、尿潴留发生率等。结果两组手术时间比较，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；腹腔镜组术中出血量明显少于开腹组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）；腹腔镜组切除的阴道长度[（3.4±0.5）cm]大于开腹组[（3.2±0.4）cm]，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；两组术中切除的淋巴结数目，切除的主、骶韧带长度，术后尿潴留发生率比较，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 LRH较RAH具有创伤小、手术安全性高、出血量少、手术彻底、术后恢复快等优点，对手术治疗宫颈癌有重要临床应用价值。%Objective To compare the efficacy of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hys-terectomy(RAH) for the treatment of cervical cancer. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 63 patients with cervical cancer,who were with LRH(LRH group) in the hospital from Januray 2012 to June 2013;simultaneous-ly,other 74 patients with cervical cancer,who were with RAH(RAH group),were selected as control group. To observe the opera-tive time,intra-operative blood volume,number of lymph nodes resected,vaginal resection length,cardinal ligament length,post-operative intertion status,urinary retention and so on. Results The operative time were not significantly different between the two groups(P>0.05).The intra-operative blood volume of the LRH group was significantly less than that of the RAH group (P<0.01). The vaginal resection length of the LRH group was(3.4±0.5)cm,which was longer than that of the RAH group[(3.2±0.4) cm] with statistically significant difference(P<0.05). The difference of the number of lymph nodes,the cardinal ligament length,the uterosacral ligament length,the incidence of postoperative urinary retention between the two groups was not statistically significance (P>0.05). Conclusion With the advantages of less trauma,security,less blood loss,quick postoperative recovery and so on,LRH has im-portant clinical value for the surgical treatment of cervical cancer.