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) ›› 2024, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (01) : 78 -81. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2024.01.021

论著

三种内镜手术治疗结肠息肉的效果及安全性观察
袁成雪(), 张宗霞, 许婷, 斯郎拉姆   
  1. 610000 成都,成都上锦南府医院,四川大学华西医院上锦医院消化内镜中心
    610041 成都,四川大学华西医院消化内科
    626099 四川康定,甘孜州人民医院内镜中心
  • 收稿日期:2023-09-04 出版日期:2024-02-26
  • 通信作者: 袁成雪

Effect and safety of three kinds of endoscopic surgeries on colon polyps

Chengxue Yuan(), Zongxia Zhang, Ting Xu, Slanglam   

  1. Center for Digestive Endoscopy, Chengdu Shangjin Nanfu Hospital, Sichuan University West China Hospital Shangjin Hospital, Chengdu Sichuan Province 610000, China
    Department of Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu Sichuan Province 610041, China
    Center for Endoscopy, Ganzi State People’s Hospital, Kangding Sichuan Province 626099, China
  • Received:2023-09-04 Published:2024-02-26
  • Corresponding author: Chengxue Yuan
  • Supported by:
    Study on Epidemic Regularity and Variation of Pathogen Spectrum of Bacterial Infectious Diseases in Army(2018ZX10713003-001)
引用本文:

袁成雪, 张宗霞, 许婷, 斯郎拉姆. 三种内镜手术治疗结肠息肉的效果及安全性观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 78-81.

Chengxue Yuan, Zongxia Zhang, Ting Xu, Slanglam. Effect and safety of three kinds of endoscopic surgeries on colon polyps[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(01): 78-81.

目的

探究内镜下高频电切术、内镜下圈套器冷切除术、内镜下黏膜切除术治疗结肠息肉的效果及安全性。

方法

回顾性分析2021年3月至2022年3月行内镜手术切除结肠息肉95例患者的临床资料,按切除方式不同分为A组(n=29,行内镜下高频电切术)、B组(n=31,行内镜下圈套器冷切除术)和C组(n=35,行内镜下黏膜切除术)。采用SPSS 24.0软件进行数据分析,三组患者围手术期指标,术前、术后24 h血清前列腺素E2(PGE2)、肿瘤坏死因子α(TNF-α)、白细胞介素6(IL-6)水平等计量资料采用单因素方差分析;息肉切除情况、并发症以及术后1年复发率等计数资料采用χ2检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

三组患者术后胃肠功能恢复时间、住院时间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),C组患者内镜下操作时间长于A、B组(P<0.05),术中出血量低于A、B组(P<0.05),B组患者术中出血量高于A组(P<0.05);术后24 h三组患者血清PGE2、TNF-α、IL-6水平均高于术前(P<0.05),且B、C组均低于A组(P<0.05);术后1年三组患者复发率比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),且C组复发率低于A组(P<0.05)。

结论

三种术式治疗结肠息肉临床疗效相当,内镜下黏膜切除术在减轻术后炎症反应以及预防复发方面优于高频电切术,值得推广应用。

Objective

To explore the effect and safety of endoscopic high-frequency electrical resection, endoscopic cold snare resection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the treatment of colon polyps.

Methods

Data of 95 patients with colon polyps who underwent endoscopic surgical resection from March 2021 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients were divided into group A (29 cases, endoscopic high-frequency electrical resection), group B (31 cases, endoscopic cold snare resection) and group C (35 cases, endoscopic mucosal resection) according to different treatment methods. SPSS 24.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Perioperative indicators, levels of serum prostaglandin (PGE2), tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) before surgery and at 24 hours after surgery and other measurement data were performed by One-way ANOVA of variance. Polyp resection, complications, recurrence rate at 1 year after surgery and other enumeration data were compared by χ2 test. P<0.05 was expressed as a statistical significance.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery time and hospital stay among the three groups (P>0.05), and the endoscopic operation time in group C was longer than that in groups A and B (P<0.05), and the intraoperative blood loss was less than that in groups A and B (P<0.05), and the intraoperative blood loss in group B was more than that in group A (P<0.05). At 24 hours after surgery, serum levels of PGE2, TNF-α and IL-6 in the three groups were higher than those before surgery (P<0.05), and the above levels in groups B and C were lower than those in group A (P<0.05). At 1 year after surgery, the difference in the recurrence rate was statistically significant among the three groups (P<0.05), and the recurrence rate was lower in group C than that in group A (P<0.05).

Conclusion

The clinical efficacy of the three surgical methods is comparable. Endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to high-frequency electrical resection in relieving postoperative inflammatory response and preventing recurrence, thus it is worthy of popularization and application.

表1 95例结肠息肉不同切除方式三组患者一般资料比较[(),例]
表2 95例结肠息肉不同切除方式三组患者围手术期指标比较()
表3 95例结肠息肉不同切除方式三组患者息肉切除情况比较[例(%)]
表4 95例结肠息肉不同切除方式三组患者并发症比较[例(%)]
表5 95例结肠息肉不同切除方式三组患者血清PGE2、TNF-α、IL-6水平比较[(),pg/ml]
[1]
Tanaka SSaitoh YMatsuda T,et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps[J]. J Gastroenterol, 2021, 56(4): 323–335.
[2]
张卓,刁卓,谢娅娟,等. 内镜下黏膜切除与高频电刀切除治疗结肠息肉的临床疗效、复发率及安全性比较[J]. 中国煤炭工业医学杂志, 2022, 25(06): 625–628.
[3]
林丽琳,陈素玉,陈建华,等. 冷圈套器切除术治疗右半结肠浅表型息肉的安全性分析[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2023, 29(04): 64–72.
[4]
莫双阳,蔡怀阳,王迎伟,等. 结直肠息肉内镜下圈套器冷切除的临床疗效与安全性[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗, 2021, 26(11): 1449–1452.
[5]
傅亮,肖波,吴曦,等. 内镜下氩离子凝固术、高频电凝电切术及黏膜切除术治疗结肠息肉的疗效比较研究[J]. 现代生物医学进展, 2019, 19(19): 3759–3762,3783.
[6]
孙浩,张海涛,宁玉凤,等. 内镜治疗结肠息肉的疗效及术后迟发性出血的相关因素分析[J]. 中南医学科学杂志, 2019, 47(05): 524–526,530.
[7]
孙建明,高元平,郝卫刚,等. 内镜下黏膜切除术治疗胃肠道息肉对患者红细胞免疫功能、炎性因子的影响分析[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗, 2019, 24(10): 1146–1149.
[8]
苑彩云,刘加宁,钟瑞妹. 内镜下结肠息肉冷切除对结肠息肉患者出血量及血清疼痛因子水平的影响研究[J]. 临床和实验医学杂志, 2022, 21(10): 1057–1060.
[9]
Ortigão RWeigt JAfifi A,et al. Cold versus hot polypectomy/endoscopic mucosal resection-A review of current evidence[J]. United European Gastroenterol J, 2021, 9(8): 938–946.
[10]
de Benito Sanz MHernández LGarcia Martinez MI,et al. Efficacy and safety of cold versus hot snare polypectomy for small(5-9 mm)colorectal polyps: a multicenter randomized controlled trial[J]. Endoscopy, 2022, 54(1): 35–44.
[11]
柴晓霞,张秋丽. 结肠镜辅助下结直肠息肉切除术的临床效果及对患者术后疼痛、胃肠功能的影响[J]. 中国全科医学, 2020, 23(S2): 181–183.
[12]
徐艳丽,陆启峰,王双平,等. 内镜下冷圈套器切除直径<1 cm的结直肠息肉疗效及迟发出血风险分析[J]. 河北医学, 2022, 28(05): 857–861.
[13]
Inagaki YYoshida NFukumoto K,et al. Risk Factors of Delayed Bleeding After Cold Snare Polypectomy for Colorectal Polyps: A Multicenter Study[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 2022, 67(7): 3177–3184.
[14]
武伟,郭锋,梁军才,等. 内镜下不同术式治疗结肠息肉的近期疗效及术后复发率比较[J]. 中国中西医结合消化杂志, 2022, 30(07): 475–479.
[1] 张丽娟, 陈科岐, 郑孝志, 吴菁, 顾星, 夏恩慧, 李必瑾, 宋署. 经直肠腔内灌注肠道超声造影诊断结直肠占位性病变的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2018, 15(12): 953-959.
[2] 蔡曼妮, 韩向阳, 黄咏东, 何周桃, 王裕宣, 张东艳, 颜超, 刘宁. 假性蛋白激酶3在结肠息肉癌变过程中的表达意义[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2020, 14(06): 439-442.
[3] 陈波, 彭超, 谭小辉, 王国仲, 涂元茂. ESD治疗十二指肠非壶腹部侧向发育型肿瘤的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(02): 222-225.
[4] 刘东岳, 解曼, 孔心涓, 饶伟. 实体器官移植受者移植术后下消化道并发症流行病学及影响因素[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(01): 71-74.
[5] 周巧直, 俞力, 牛应林, 吕富靖, 李鹏, 冀明, 王拥军, 张澍田. 消化道类癌三种内镜治疗方法的比较[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2016, 09(01): 11-14.
[6] 钟芸诗. 内镜治疗早期肠道肿瘤相关问题探讨[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2014, 03(01): 12-17.
[7] 张政赢, 鞠阳, 刘晓宁. 二甲双胍对2型糖尿病患者大肠腺瘤术后复发的影响[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 485-488.
[8] 杨翠萍, 杨晓金, 全旭, 谢玲, 吴云林, 陈平. 肝细胞核因子-1α基因突变协同腺瘤样结肠息肉病基因突变对家族性腺瘤性息肉病细胞增殖的影响[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2022, 12(04): 228-231.
[9] 杨晓金, 李婷, 蔡波尔, 吴云林, 陈平, 杨翠萍. 五个家族性腺瘤性息肉病家系分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2022, 12(04): 220-223.
[10] 马新力, 王义国. 粪便钙卫蛋白检测在结肠息肉中的应用价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2019, 09(06): 272-274.
[11] 叶淑君, 刘阳, 马连君. 肠道准备与结肠息肉检出率的研究进展[J]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2022, 09(02): 104-107.
阅读次数
全文


摘要