Please wait a minute...

中国现代手术学杂志  2018, Vol. 22 Issue (4): 285-290    DOI: 10.16260/j.cnki.1009-2188.2018.04.012
  临床论著 |
自体心包奇静脉补片肺动脉重建对中心型肺癌患者术后并发症和预后的影响#br#
赵振山,李海洋,赵振兴,代岱,郝孟辉
唐山市开滦总医院心胸外科, 河北唐山  063000
Effect of Pulmonary Artery Reconstruction with Autologous Pericardial or Azygos Vein Graft Patch in Patients with Central Lung Cancer#br# #br#
ZHAO Zhenshan, LI Haiyang, ZHAO Zhenxing, DAI Dai, HAO Menghui#br#
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Kailuan General Hospital, Tangshan 063000, Hebei, China
下载:  PDF (0KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 [摘要]目的探究以自体心包、奇静脉补片行肺动脉重建对于中心型肺癌患者术后并发症和预后的影响。方法回顾性分析2013年1月至2015年1月间于我院行手术治疗的98例肺癌患者的临床资料,根据手术方式分为全肺切除组(47例)和肺动脉重建组(51例),分别行全肺切除术和肺叶切除术+自体心包、奇静脉补片肺动脉重建术,比较两组患者手术前后肺功能情况,包括一秒用力呼气容积(forced expiratory volume in one second, FEV1),用力肺活量(forced vital capacity, FVC),每分钟最大通气量(maximal voluntary ventilation, MVV),肺一氧化碳弥散因子(transfer factor for carbon monoxide of lung, TLCO),手术情况,术后并发症发生率和生存率。结果手术前,两组患者FEV1、FVC、MVV和TLCO无统计学差异 (P=0.947, 0.710, 0.608, 0.858), 手术后2个月, 两组患者上述指标显著低于手术前 (P<0.05), 而肺动脉重建组的上述指标显著高于全肺切除组 (均为P<0.001); 肺动脉重建组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、 术后胸腔引流量、 术后下地时间以及住院时间显著低于全肺切除组(P=0.027或P<0.001), 两组患者术中淋巴结清除数目无统计学差异 (P=0.440); 肺动脉重建组术后并发症发生率显著低于全肺切除组(9.80% vs. 25.53%,P=0.040);两组患者的总生存率无统计学差异(HR=0.522,95%CI[0.241,1.130], P=0.095);肺动脉重建组患者的无进展生存率明显高于全肺切除组(HR=0.471,95%CI[0.237,0.935], P=0.031)。结论以自体心包、奇静脉补片行肺动脉重建可以显著改善患者肺功能,手术创伤小,术后恢复快,术后并发症少,并能改善预后。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
赵振山
李海洋
赵振兴
代岱
郝孟辉
关键词:     自体心包补片移植  奇静脉补片移植  肺动脉重建  肺肿瘤  并发症  预后
    
Abstract: Abstract:ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of pulmonary artery reconstruction with autologous pericardial or azygos vein graft patch on postoperative complications and prognosis of patients with central lung cancer.MethodsThe clinical data of 98 patients with lung cancer who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital from January 2013 to January 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the surgical methods, they were divided into the pneumonectomy group (47 cases) and the pulmonary artery reconstruction group (51 cases). The pulmonary function such as forced expiratory volume in one second(FEV1), forced vital capacity(FVC), maximal voluntary ventilation(MVV), transfer factor for carbon monoxide of lung(TLCO), and operative related indicators, postoperative complications and survival rates were compared between the two groups.
ResultsThere was no significant difference in FEV1, FVC, MVV and TLCO between the two groups before operation (P=0.947,0.710,0.608,0.858). The above indexes significantly decreased in the two groups 2 months after operation (P<0.05), and the above indexes in the pulmonary artery reconstruction group were significantly higher than that of the pneumonectomy group (P<0.001). Operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, thoracic drainage volume, postoperative offbed interval and hospitalization time of the pulmonary artery reconstruction group were significantly lower than that of the total pneumonectomy group (P=0.027 or P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the number of lymph node clearance between the two groups (P=0.440). The incidence of postoperative complications in pulmonary artery reconstruction group was significantly lower than that of the pneumonectomy group (9.80% vs. 25.53%,P=0.040). There was no significant difference in the total survival rate between the two groups (HR=0.522, 95%CI [0.241,1.130], P=0.095), and the progression free survival rate in the pulmonary artery reconstruction group was significantly higher than that of the pneumonectomy group (HR=0.471, 95%CI [0.237,0.935], P=0.031).ConclusionPulmonary artery reconstruction with autologous pericardial or azygos vein graft patch can significantly improve the pulmonary function, alleviate surgical trauma, shorten recovery time, reduce postoperative complications and improve the prognosis for the central lung cancer patients.

Key words:       autologous pericardial patch transplantation    azygos vein patch transplantation    pulmonary artery reconstruction    lung neoplasms    complications    prognosis

               出版日期:  2018-08-26      发布日期:  2018-10-23      期的出版日期:  2018-08-26
ZTFLH:  R734.2  
基金资助:  唐山市科技计划项目 (编号:14130228a)
通讯作者:  赵振山,男,40岁,唐山市开滦总医院心胸外科主治医师,硕士研究生。   
作者简介:  赵振山,男,40岁,唐山市开滦总医院心胸外科主治医师,硕士研究生。
引用本文:    
赵振山, 李海洋, 赵振兴, 代岱, 郝孟辉. 自体心包奇静脉补片肺动脉重建对中心型肺癌患者术后并发症和预后的影响#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 285-290.
ZHAO Zhenshan, LI Haiyang, ZHAO Zhenxing, DAI Dai, HAO Menghui. Effect of Pulmonary Artery Reconstruction with Autologous Pericardial or Azygos Vein Graft Patch in Patients with Central Lung Cancer#br# #br#. Chinese Journal of Modern Operative Surgery, 2018, 22(4): 285-290.
链接本文:  
http://www.surgerychina.com/CN/10.16260/j.cnki.1009-2188.2018.04.012  或          http://www.surgerychina.com/CN/Y2018/V22/I4/285
[1] 杨寅熙, 吴一峰, 吴铁. TEP与TAPP术治疗腹股沟疝临床疗效比较#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 241-243.
[2] 丁科, 唐腾龙, 左仲坤, 彭伟辉, 张磊屹, 黄江生, 段伦喜. 腹腔镜下结肠癌手术患者术后肺部并发症的危险因素分析#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 244-247.
[3] 文磊, 杜军, 刘宏滨. “AO”张力带治疗RockwoodⅡ、Ⅲ型髌骨骨折的临床疗效对比#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 254-257.
[4] 熊军, 刘韦, 黎早敏, 陈剑飞. 有或无牵引床辅助复位下股骨近端防旋髓内钉治疗老年股骨转子间骨折#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 274-276.
[5] 许宇浪, 纪志华, 刘强, 吴小萌. 两种术式治疗股骨远端单髁或双髁冠状面骨折的疗效对比#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 277-280.
[6] 谭瑛, 梁曼, 张贻岚, 罗丹. 不同浓度罗哌卡因联合舒芬太尼应用于硬膜外分娩镇痛的效果分析#br#[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(4): 311-315.
[7] 胡星明,肖高明,吴安邦,周彬,陈跃军. 单向式单操作孔胸腔镜肺癌根治术临床应用分析[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(2): 85-89.
[8] 毛盛名,何红苏,林建清,肖强,刘岳,陈文哲,倪亚安. 减少腹腔镜再次胆道手术并发症的策略(22例临床分析)[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2018, 22(2): 106-108.
[9] 米博文,张立新,刘义辉. 前方直接入路与后外侧入路全髋关节置换术近期疗效比较[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2017, 21(6): 440-444.
[10] 刘跃光,向芹,李文科,杜建辉,郭军宏,黄占洪,熊丽,吴镇秋. 输尿管软镜结合钬激光治疗上尿路结石199例分析报告[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2017, 21(4): 313-315.
[11] 付召军,杨玉辉,魏健,胡楠,田晓军. 不同侧孔引流管结合引流辅助装置在腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的应用[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2017, 21(2): 99-104.
[12] 丁浩,陆亚东,马春平. 避开肋间神经闭合技术在肺癌手术中的应用价值分析[J]. 中国现代手术学杂志, 2017, 21(2): 113-116.
[1] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 168 -173 .
[2] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 174 -177 .
[3] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 178 -181 .
[4] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 182 -186 .
[5] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 187 -190 .
[6] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 191 -193 .
[7] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 194 -196 .
[8] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 197 -200 .
[9] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 201 -205 .
[10] . [J]. Chinese journal of modern operative surgery, 2017, 21(3): 206 -210 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed