摘要
目的:评价内镜下环周切开术( ECI)与球囊扩张术( EBD)治疗食管吻合口良性狭窄的疗效和安全性。方法:选取2016年7月至2021年1月海南省人民医院住院64例食管癌、贲门癌术后确诊食管胃吻合口良性狭窄患者，根据治疗方式不同将其分为ECI治疗组和EBD治疗组，根据两组患者术前及术后1、6、12个月随访资料，比较两组手术安全性及其临床疗效。结果:两组患者总有效率比较，ECI组术后总有效率达96.88%，EBD组术后总有效率75%，ECI组较EBD总有效率比较，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组术前及术后1、6、12个月吞咽困难难评级评分比较提示提示，ECI组在改善患者吞咽困难症状更为明显，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:与EBD相比，ECI对治疗食管胃吻合口良性狭窄是一种更为安全有效的治疗方法。
Abstract
Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic circumferential incision (ECI) and balloon dilatation (EBD) in the treatment of benign esophageal anastomotic stenosis.Methods:From July 2016 to January 2021, 64 patients with benign esophagogastric anastomotic stricture diagnosed after surgery for esophageal and cardiac cancer in Hainan Provincial People′s Hospital were divided into ECI treatment group and EBD treatment group according to different treatment methods.According to the follow-up data of patients in the two groups before treatment and 1, 6 and 12 months after treatment, the safety and clinical efficacy of the two groups were compared.Results:The total effective rate of the two groups was 96.88% in the ECI group and 75% in the balloon dilation group. The total effective rate of the ECI group compared with the EBD group was P<0.05, the difference was statistically significant.The comparison of dysphagia rating scores between the two groups before and 1, 6, and 12 months after operation suggested that ECI group was more significant in improving dysphagia symptoms of patients (P<0.05), with a statistically significant difference.Conclusion:Compared with balloon dilatation, endoscopic circumferential incision is a more safe and effective treatment for benign stricture of esophagogastric anastomosis.
万方数据