切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版) ›› 2019, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (02) : 186 -189. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2019.02.024

所属专题: 文献

论著

三种术式治疗甲状腺癌的疗效比较
康鸿斌1, 李江涛2, 李鑫1,()   
  1. 1. 010050 呼和浩特,内蒙古医科大学附属医院甲乳外科
    2. 310000,浙江大学医学院附属第二医院滨江分院甲乳外科
  • 收稿日期:2018-05-28 出版日期:2019-04-26
  • 通信作者: 李鑫

Comparison of curative effect among three kinds of surgical methods for thyroid cancer

Hongbin Kang1, Jiangtao Li2, Xin Li1,()   

  1. 1. Department of first breast surgery, affiliated hospital of inner Mongolia medical university, inner Mongolia 010050
    2. Department of thyroid surgery, binjiang branch, second affiliated hospital of medical college, Zhejiang university, Zhejiang 310000
  • Received:2018-05-28 Published:2019-04-26
  • Corresponding author: Xin Li
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Li Xin, Email:
引用本文:

康鸿斌, 李江涛, 李鑫. 三种术式治疗甲状腺癌的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(02): 186-189.

Hongbin Kang, Jiangtao Li, Xin Li. Comparison of curative effect among three kinds of surgical methods for thyroid cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(02): 186-189.

目的

探讨乳晕入路腹腔镜、小切口腹腔镜与开放手术治疗甲状腺癌的疗效及免疫水平改善情况。

方法

选取138例甲状腺癌患者,随机分为A、B、C三组,各46例,分别给予乳晕入路腹腔镜手术、小切口腹腔镜手术及开放手术。三组数据的分析应用统计学软件SPSS22.0完成。手术相关指标、免疫功能指标用(±s)表示,三样本的比较采用单因素方差分析,两样本的比较采用独立t检验;临床治疗总有效率和术后并发症分析采用四格表χ2检验;P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

A组手术时间,长于B组及C组(均P<0.05),A组术中出血量、术后引流量均高于B组、低于C组(均P<0.05);A组、B组住院时间均短于C组(P<0.05)。A、B、C三组患者的总有效率分别为95.7%,90.9%,76.1%,A组及B组总有效率均高于C组(P<0.05)。A、B、C三组患者并发症发生率分别为6.5%、8.7%、32.6%(P<0.05),其中A、B两组并发症发生率均低于C组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。术后A组及B患者的NK细胞水平均低于C组(P<0.05),A组及B组患者的CD3、CD4水平均高于C组(P<0.05),即A组患者经手术创伤应激导致的免疫抑制作用最小。

结论

乳晕入路腹腔镜、小切口腹腔镜均具有良好的手术效果,二者术后并发症发生率均较低,小切口腹腔镜的手术时间、术中出血量及术中引流量等方面均优于乳晕入路腹腔镜,但是乳晕入路腹腔镜对患者的免疫抑制作用较小,二者手术效果均优于开放手术,值得推广应用。

Objective

To investigate the efficacy and improvement of immune status in the treatment of thyroid cancer with laparoscopic laparoscopy, small incision laparoscopy and open surgery.

Methods

A total of 138 patients with thyroid cancer were selected and randomly divided into three groups: group A, group B, and group C, 46 cases in each group, they were given laparoscopic surgery(group A), small incision laparoscopic surgery(group B), and open surgery(group C) respectively. The clinical data was analyzed through statistical software SPSS22.0. The surgically-related indexes and immunological function indexes were expressed as (±s). The three-sample comparison was compared by one-way analysis of variance, the two-sample comparison was compared by the independent t\\test, and the total clinical efficacy and postoperative complication rates were compared by a four-cell table χ2 test. The difference was statistically significant when P<0.05.

Results

The operation time in group A was longer than those in group B and group C (all P<0.05). The blood loss and postoperative drainage in group A were higher than those in group B and group C (all P<0.05); The hospitalization time in group A and B were shorter than that in group C (P<0.05). The total effective rates in group A, B, and C were 95.7%, 90.9%, and 76.1% respectively. The total effective rate in group A and group B were higher than that in group C (P<0.05). The complication rates in group A, B, and C were 6.5%, 8.7%, and 32.6% respectively, the difference among the three groups was statistically significant (P<0.05), among them, the incidence of complications in A and B groups were lower than those in group C, the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). After the operation, the NK cell levels in group A and B were lower than that in group C (P<0.05). The levels of CD3+ , CD4+ in group A and B were significantly higher than those in group C (P<0.05), so patients in group A had minimal immunosuppression after surgical traumatic stress.

Conclusion

Areola laparoscopy and small incision laparoscopy have good surgical results, laparoscopy were better than the areola laparoscopy in operation time, intraoperative blood loss and intraoperative drainage of small incision, the incidence of postoperative complications is low in the two surgical methods, however, areola laparoscopy has less immunosuppressive effect on patients, both surgical results are superior than open surgery and worthy of popularization and application.

表1 138例甲状腺癌患者不同术式三组患者基线资料比较[(±s),例]
表2 138例甲状腺癌患者不同术式三组患者手术相关指标的比较(±s)
表3 138例甲状腺癌患者不同术式三组患者临床疗效的比较[例(%)]
表4 138例甲状腺癌患者不同术式三组患者并发症发生率的比较[例(%)]
[1]
French JD,Haugen BR.Thyroid-Specific T Cells in Patients With Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Implications for Immune-Based Therapies?[J].J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2017,102(7):2131-2132.
[2]
仉志军,杨兴旺,杨春晓,等.腹腔镜下改良淋巴结清扫术在甲状腺癌中的应用价值[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志:电子版,2016,10(3):228-230.
[3]
Hao G.Effects comparison of laparoscopic assisted small incision thyroidectomy and open surgery on patients with thyroid tumor[J]. Clinical Medicine,2018,38(1):3-4.
[4]
薛会朝,王雷,程少华,等.经乳晕入路完全腔镜甲状腺手术的操作技巧与体会[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2017,22(4):256-261.
[5]
Ehlers M,Kuebart A,Hautzel H,et al.Epitope-specific antitumor immunity suppresses tumor spread in papillary thyroid cancer[J].J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2017,102(7):2154-2161.
[6]
徐友标,江友辉,孟云,等.不同手术式治疗甲状腺癌的临床疗效分析[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志:电子版,2016,10(5):393-395.
[7]
Braun C,Kisser U,Huber A,et al.Bystander cricothyroidotomy with household devices-A fresh cadaveric feasibility study[J].Resuscitation, 2017,110:37-41.
[8]
王勇,王玲.甲状腺微小乳头状癌中央区淋巴结转移的临床分析[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志:电子版,2016,10(5):390-392.
[9]
Luo Y,Qiu YE,Mu YF,et al.Plastic wound protectors decreased surgical site infections following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study[J].Medicine,2017,96(37):e7752.
[10]
Wang LY,Nixon IJ,Patel SG,et al.Operative management of locally advanced,differentiated thyroid cancer[J].Surgery,2016,160(3):738】46.
[11]
宋延冰,姚中杨.乳晕入路全腔镜下甲状腺癌根治术与小切口甲状腺癌根治术的临床对比分析[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2016,21(11):804-806.
[12]
Ahn HS,Kim HJ,Kim KH,et al.Thyroid cancer screening in South Korea increases detection of papillary cancers with no impact on other subtypes or thyroid cancer mortality[J].Thyroid,2016,26(11):1535-1540.
[13]
Jr J K. When and How to " Open" in Laparoscopic or Robotic Surgery[J]. Obesity Surgery, 2016, 26(4):891.
[14]
高新宝,贾高磊,田志龙,等.全乳晕入路与胸乳入路腔镜手术治疗甲状腺微灶癌的临床比较[J].中国普通外科杂志,2016,25(11):1550-1556.
[15]
Sharma A,Jasim S,Reading CC,et al.Clinical Presentation and Diagnostic Challenges of Thyroid Lymphoma - A Cohort Study[J].Thyroid, 2016,26(8):1061-1067.
[16]
乐飞,游小龙,陈雯,等.小切口腔镜辅助甲状腺切除术治疗分化型甲状腺癌的疗效观察[J].实用癌症杂志,2018,33(2):227-229.
[1] 杨桂清, 孟静静. 哺乳期亚临床乳腺炎的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 376-379.
[2] 戴睿, 张亮, 陈浏阳, 张永博, 吴丕根, 孙华, 杨盛, 孟博. 肠道菌群与椎间盘退行性变相关性的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2024, 19(06): 546-549.
[3] 王振宁, 杨康, 王得晨, 邹敏, 归明彬, 王雅楠, 徐明. 机器人与腹腔镜手术联合经自然腔道取标本对中低位直肠癌患者远期疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 437-442.
[4] 张洁, 罗小霞, 余鸿. 系统性免疫炎症指数对急性胰腺炎患者并发器官功能损伤的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 68-71.
[5] 孙莲, 马红萍, 吴文英. 局部进展期甲状腺癌患者外科处理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 112-114.
[6] 麻紫月, 王贞文, 张强, 赵代伟, 张翊伦. 右侧喉不返神经1例报告[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 115-116.
[7] 梁孟杰, 朱欢欢, 王行舟, 江航, 艾世超, 孙锋, 宋鹏, 王萌, 刘颂, 夏雪峰, 杜峻峰, 傅双, 陆晓峰, 沈晓菲, 管文贤. 联合免疫治疗的胃癌转化治疗患者预后及术后并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 619-623.
[8] 张志兆, 王睿, 郜苹苹, 王成方, 王成, 齐晓伟. DNMT3B与乳腺癌预后的关系及其生物学机制[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 624-629.
[9] 司钦亮, 毕世龙, 焦慧骁, 李世照, 陈哲禹, 武玉东. 精索去分化脂肪肉瘤两例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 585-590.
[10] 林逸, 钟文龙, 李锴文, 何旺, 林天歆. 广东省医学会泌尿外科疑难病例多学科会诊(第15期)——转移性膀胱癌的综合治疗[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 648-652.
[11] 王大伟, 陆雅斐, 皇甫少华, 陈玉婷, 陈澳, 江滨. 间充质干细胞通过调控免疫机制促进创面愈合的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 361-366.
[12] 魏志鸿, 刘建勇, 吴小雅, 杨芳, 吕立志, 江艺, 蔡秋程. 肝移植术后急性移植物抗宿主病的诊治(附四例报告)[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 846-851.
[13] 张龙, 孙善柯, 徐伟, 李文柱, 李俊达, 池涌泉, 何广胜, 成峰, 王学浩, 饶建华. 腹腔镜脾切除治疗血液系统疾病的临床疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 870-875.
[14] 董佳, 王坤, 张莉. 预后营养指数结合免疫球蛋白、血糖及甲胎蛋白对HBV 相关慢加急性肝衰竭患者治疗后预后不良的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 555-559.
[15] 谭瑞义. 小细胞骨肉瘤诊断及治疗研究现状与进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 781-784.
阅读次数
全文


摘要