单孔法与三孔法胸腔镜肺大疱切除术疗效比较

目的：比较单孔法与三孔法电视胸腔镜手术治疗肺大疱的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析本院行肺大疱106例电视胸腔镜手术治疗情况，其中行单孔法切除术51例称单孔法组，行三孔法切除术55例称三孔法组，对两组的手术时间、切口总长度、术中出血量、术后胸管引流总量、胸管留置时间、术后住院时间、住院费用、术后疼痛程度等指标进行对比。结果所有患者均手术成功，两组手术时间、术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义；单孔法组较三孔法组手术切口总长度小（4．1±0．4）cm vs（4．9±0．5） cm]，术后胸管引流总量减少（186±79）ml vs（219±80）ml]，胸管留置时间缩短（2．3±1．6） d vs（2．9±1．6）d]，术后疼痛程度比对照组轻，差异均具有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。结论与传统的三孔法相比，单孔法有利于减轻疼痛、提高患者生活质量。

Efficacy comparison of single utility port and three port video-assisted thoracoscopic sur-gery to treat pulmonary bulla

Objective To study the feasibility and clinical value of single utility port complete video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery （ VATS） to treat pulmonary bulla.Methods We retrospectively analyzed 106 pulmonary bulla patients treated with VATS.51 patients received single utility port complete VATS （ single-port group） and 55 patients received three port VATS （ three-port group） . The operation time, wound size, blood loss, post-operative drainage time and volume, post-operative hospital stay and assessment of pain between two groups were compared.Results All the patients underwent thoracic operation successfully, there was no statistically significant difference in operation time and blood lost between the two groups;Compared with control group, the length of the incision in observation group was shorter （4.1 ±0.39）cm vs （4.9 ±0.46） cm], the tube drainage was less（186 ±79）ml vs（219±80） ml], and the thoracic tube sustain less longer（2.3 ±1.6） d vs（2.9 ±1.6）d].The post-operative pain level compared with the con-trol group was statistically significant.Conclusions The single utility port complete VATS is feasible in the treatment of pulmonary bulla and can improve the quality of life for patients.