摘要
目的探讨局限性前列腺癌患者采用腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术（Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy，LRP）与耻骨后前列腺癌根治术（Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer after pubicbone，RRP）治疗的临床效果及安全性差异。方法本研究采用回顾性研究方法对本院泌尿外科收治的120例行前列腺癌根治术患者的临床资料、术后随访资料进行分析，根据手术方式分为LRP组69例、RRP组51例，采用SPSS17．0统计软件对两组患者的资料进行分析，分析比较两组患者的手术效果及安全性差异。结果LRP组患者的手术时间（220．6±61．5）min显著的高于RRP组（P〈0．05），LRP组的术中出血量、手术后疼痛评分、术后胃肠道功能恢复时间、导尿管留置时间、住院时间均显著的低于RRP组患者且差异具有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。LRP组患者的手术总并发症为2．90％，显著的低于RRP组的15．67％且差异具有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。LRP组的切缘阳性率17．39％与RRP组的19．61％差异不显著（P〉0．05），LRP组术后1年、2年的生化复发率8．70％、26．09％与RRP组的7．84％、21．57％差异不具有统计学意义（P〉0．05），LRP组的术后1年完全尿控率92．75％与RRP组的94．12％比较差异不具有统计学意义（P〉0．05）。LRP组的术后勃起良好率66．67％显著的低于术前的97．10％（P〈0．05），RRP组的术后勃起良好率56．86％显著的低于术前的98．04％（P〈0．05），两组患者术后勃起良好率比较差异不具有统计学意义（χ^2=1．203，P〉0．05）。结论局限性前列腺癌患者采用LRP治疗与RRP治疗取得相似的临床效果，但是具有创伤小、术中失血量少、患者恢复较快、手术并发症率低的优点。
Objectives To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy（LRP） and radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer after public bone（RRP） in treatment of patients with localized prostate cancer. Methods A retrospective ana/ysis of the clinical data and follow - up data of 120 patients with localized prostate cancer were randomly divided into LRP group （n = 69 ） and RRP group （n = 51 ） according to surgical methods. The efficacy and safety in both groups were compared and analyzed by SPSS17.0. Results The operation time in LRP group（220.6±61.5）min was significantly higher than that in the RRP group（ P 〈0.05） ;Peri -operative bleeding, postoperative pain score, recovery time of gastrointestinal function, indwelling time of a urethral catheter and hospital stay in LRP group were significantly lower than that in the RRP group, and the difference was statistically significant（ P 〈 0.05 ）. The overall operative morbidity in LRP group （2. 90% ） was significantly lower than that in RRP group（ 15.67% ）, and the difference was statistically significant（ P 〈 0.05）. There was no significant difference on the positive surgical margins between LRP group 17.39% and RRP group（ 19.61% , P 〉 0.05）. At 1 year and 2 year post - operation, recurrence rates between LRP group（8.70% ,26.09% ） and RRP group（7.84% ,21.57% ） were not significant difference （ P 〉 0.05 ）. At 1 year post - operation, the complete continence rates between the LRP group（92.75% ） and the RRP group（94. 12% ） were not statistical significance（ P 〉0. 05 ） , the postoperative erectile rates in LRP group and RRP group were not statistical difference （ P 〉 0.05 ）. Conclusions LRP and RRP in treatment of patients with localized prostate cancer have similar clinical effect, the former has the advantages of lesser trauma , less bleeding, light pain and low complicaton rate.
出处
《国际泌尿系统杂志》
2016年第4期521-525,共5页
International Journal of Urology and Nephrology
