摘要
目的对比采用脾动脉栓塞(splenic arterial embolization,SAE)和开腹脾切除(splenectomy,SPM)治疗门脉高压性脾功能亢进的近期结果,探讨处理门脉高压性脾功能亢进的合理方法. 方法 2001年1月～2003年12月门脉高压性脾亢患者17例,分别采用SAE 8例和SPM治疗9例,就两组病例治疗后的住院时间、发热时间、出院时有无症状及并发症发生情况进行对比分析. 结果 SAE组治疗后住院时间和发热时间分别为(21.38±9.58)d和(19.38±10.73)d,SPM组则分别为(13.00±4.77)d和(4.78±4.32)d.SPM组明显短于SAE组(分别为P=0.042,P=0.007),而且并发症发生率明显少于SAE组,出院时的有症状率也明显低于SAE组(P=0.0036). 结论目前SAE应用于门脉高压性脾亢的治疗尚存在术后住院时间长、发热时间久、并发症多等弊端,作为常规应用于门脉高压性脾亢的治疗尚待进一步改进和积累更多的经验.
Objective To comparatively analyse the short - term results of splenic arterial embolization (SAE) and splenectomy (SPM) for hy persplenism. Methods 17 cases of patients with hypersple nism secondary to portal hypertension treated by SAE or SPM admitted from Januar y 2001 to December 2003 were comparatively analysed with regard to the hospital stay, fever-lasting period and the incidence of complication. 8 cases underwent SAE (SAE group) and 9 cases underwent SPM (SPM group). Results The average hospital stay and fever-lasting period in SPM group were significantly shorter than those in SAE group (13.00±4.77 VS 21.38 ±9.58, 4.78±4.32 VS 19.38±10.37) with a P value of 0.042 and 0.007 respec tively. The incidence of complication in SPM group was significantly lower than that in SAE group. Conclusions The drawing backs of long hospital stay, long fever-lasting period and high complication incidence are d emonstrated in the application of SAE for hypersplenism secondary to portal hype rtension, indicating a further modification and more practising should be done b efore the procedure be applied as a routine.
出处
《中国现代手术学杂志》
2005年第1期29-31,共3页
Chinese Journal of Modern Operative Surgery
