摘要
目的寻找贲门失弛缓症的最佳治疗方式。方法对比分析行球囊扩张和手术治疗的 39例贲门失弛缓症患者的临床疗效。 16例患者应用 Rigiflex扩张器行球囊扩张治疗 ,2 3例患者行 Heller手术治疗。结果 16例扩张术患者 1例发生扩张性穿孔 ,其余 15例食管体横径平均降低 (2 0± 6 .7) mm;贲门入口直径增宽 (2 .4± 0 .7) mm;下食管括约肌压力 (L ESP)降低 (1.9± 0 .6 ) k Pa;治疗后 Eckardt症状分的优良率为 93.3%。 2 3例手术患者食管体横径降低 (2 6± 0 .8) mm;贲门口直径增宽 (2 .9± 1.0 ) mm;LESP降低 (2 .5± 0 .5 )k Pa;术后 Eckardt症状分的优良率为 91.3%。结论两种贲门失弛缓症的治疗方式均有效 ,组间比较均无统计学差异 (P>0 .0 5 )
Objective To find the optimal way to treat achalasia.Methods 39 cases with achalasia undergoing pneumatic dilation and surgical treatment were analyzed.Rigiflex dilator was used for pneumatic dilation in 16 patients.Heller myotomy was performed in 23 patients.Results Of 16 cases treated with pneumatic dilation,one had an esophageal perforation.The mean diameter of thoracic esophagus of 15 cases was lowered by (20.0±6.7) mm and preventriculus was widened by (2.4±0.7) mm,and lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP) was lowered by (1.9±0.6) mm.The excellent good success rate for Eckardt was 93.3%.Compared with 16 cases,the mean diameter of thoracic esophagus was lowered by (26.0±0.8) mm and preventri culus was widened by (2.9±1.0) mm,LESP was lowered by (2.5±0.5) kPa.The excellent good success rate for Eckardt was 91.3%in 23 cases.Conclusion Pneumatic dilation and surgery are equally effective in the treatment of achalasis,there was not significant difference between the two groups.
出处
《中国综合临床》
北大核心
2001年第6期447-448,共2页
Clinical Medicine of China
