胃镜下注射、钛夹和电凝治疗上消化道溃疡出血的疗效分析

[目的]对内镜下黏膜注射、金属钛夹和电凝止血治疗上消化道溃疡出血疗效进行比较,为临床治疗溃疡出血寻找更佳的方法。[方法]选取上消化道溃疡并出血患者159例作为研究对象,将其按照治疗方法分为3组:注射组60例,钛夹组52例,电凝组47例,比较3组患者治疗后的即时止血率、72h再出血率、转外科手术率及平均住院天数等情况。[结果]3组患者的即时止血率比较:注射组即时止血率88.3%明显低于钛夹组96.2%、电凝组100%,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);钛夹组虽略低于电凝组,但差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。3组72h内再出血率比较:注射组(15.0%)与钛夹组(11.5%)比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);电凝组72h内再出率最低(2.1%),与注射组、钛夹组比较均差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。3组转外科手术率比较:注射组为11.7%,钛夹组为7.7%,电凝组为2.1%;注射组与电凝组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),注射组与钛夹组比较、钛夹组与电凝组比较均差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。3组患者住院天数比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),均未出现穿孔等并发症发生。[结论]内镜黏膜下注射止血、金属钛夹止血、电凝止血对溃疡出血患者的即时止血率高,疗效安全、可靠。内镜下金属钛夹和电凝止血治疗溃疡出血,较之于单纯黏膜注射止血的临床效果更可靠,电凝止血更优,且再出血和转外科手术率低,故该治疗方案作为治疗溃疡出血可进行更深入的研究,获得稳定的治疗效果。     

内镜下电凝、钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血的临床疗效

目的探讨内镜下电凝、钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血的临床疗效。方法选取210例消化性溃疡出血的患者,根据治疗方式分为3组,各70例。内镜注射组为内镜下注射肾上腺素,电凝组治疗方式为电凝联合注射肾上腺素,钛夹组为钛夹联合注射肾上腺素,术后观察比较3组止血效果与术后并发症情况。结果 3组首次止血率、止血失败率比较无统计学差异(P0.05),止血成功率、再出血率比较差异显著(P0.05)。钛夹组止血成功率、再出血率与内镜注射组比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。3组患者均未出现穿孔及其他并发症。结论内镜下电凝、钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血疗效相当,且创伤较小,并发症少。     

内镜下钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血疗效分析

目的探讨内镜下钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血的临床疗效。方法选取2014年1月至2015年12月期间青海省人民医院消化内科收治的168例消化性溃疡出血患者作为研究对象,根据患者入院顺序进行编号,将其随机分为A、B、C 3组,每组各56例。A组患者接受内镜下金属钛夹夹闭止血治疗,B组患者接受内镜下注射止血治疗,C组患者接受内镜下金属钛夹联合注射止血治疗。治疗完成后,比较3组的临床疗效、即时止血率、再出血率、外科手术率以及术后并发症发生情况。结果治疗前,3组患者的一般资料、病例分布及病情分级等方面比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。治疗后,C组治疗总有效率为94.6%,显著高于A组和B组的82.1%、75.0%(P=0.017);A组与C组的即时止血率均为100%,显著高于B组的92.9%(P=0.017);C组的再次出血发生率为1.8%,显著低于A组和B组的10.7%、16.1%(P=0.034);但在转外科手术率及术后并发症发生率方面,3组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论内镜下金属钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血近期疗效确切,具有较好的止血效果,可降低再出血发生率,具有一定的临床价值。     

钛夹治疗食管贲门黏膜撕裂综合征的临床疗效

目的:探讨金属钛夹治疗食管贲门黏膜撕裂综合征(Mallory-Weiss syndrome,MWS)的临床疗效.方法:取2008-01/2015-10济宁市第一人民医院消化内科治疗食管MWS患者111例,钛夹组52例行内镜下钛夹夹闭联合质子泵抑制剂治疗,对照组59给予质子泵抑制剂治疗.并对照2组止血效果及再出血方面的差异进行了比较和分析.结果:钛夹组有效止血率显著高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(96.15%vs 84.75%,P0.05).钛夹组再出血率明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(3.85%vs 15.25%,P0.05),所有再出血患者介入手术止血成功.结论:钛夹治疗食管MWS有效率高、再出血几率低,为有效止血措施.     

内镜下注射血凝酶联合金属钛夹治疗老年急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的临床研究

目的探讨内镜下注射血凝酶联合金属钛夹治疗老年急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血(acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding,ANVUGIB)的效果和安全性。方法选取135例老年ANVUGIB患者按照前瞻性随机数字表示法分成三组,观察组采用内镜下注射血凝酶联合金属钛夹治疗,对照一组和对照二组分别采用内镜下注射血凝酶和金属钛夹治疗,观察治疗效果。结果观察组及时止血率和总有效率均高于对照组,72 h再出血率和外科手术率降低,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);止血时间、肠蠕动恢复时间、大便潜血(OB)试验转阴时间和住院天数较对照组明显缩短,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);三组的死亡病例、并发症和药物不良反应比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论老年ANVUGIB患者采用内镜下注射血凝酶联合金属钛夹治疗,能显著提高治疗效果,改善疾病预后,临床安全性较高。     

内镜下钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血疗效分析北大核心CSCD

目的探讨内镜下钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血的临床疗效。方法选取2014年1月至2015年12月期间青海省人民医院消化内科收治的168例消化性溃疡出血患者作为研究对象,根据患者入院顺序进行编号,将其随机分为A、B、C 3组,每组各56例。A组患者接受内镜下金属钛夹夹闭止血治疗,B组患者接受内镜下注射止血治疗,C组患者接受内镜下金属钛夹联合注射止血治疗。治疗完成后,比较3组的临床疗效、即时止血率、再出血率、外科手术率以及术后并发症发生情况。结果治疗前,3组患者的一般资料、病例分布及病情分级等方面比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗后,C组治疗总有效率为94.6%,显著高于A组和B组的82.1%、75.0%(P=0.017);A组与C组的即时止血率均为100%,显著高于B组的92.9%(P=0.017);C组的再次出血发生率为1.8%,显著低于A组和B组的10.7%、16.1%(P=0.034);但在转外科手术率及术后并发症发生率方面,3组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论内镜下金属钛夹联合注射肾上腺素治疗消化性溃疡出血近期疗效确切,具有较好的止血效果,可降低再出血发生率,具有一定的临床价值。     

重症消化性溃疡出血患者行内镜下电凝或钛夹联合注射康复新治疗的疗效评价

目的探讨重症消化性溃疡出血患者行内镜下电凝或钛夹联合注射康复新治疗的疗效。方法选取我院消化内科进行治疗的73例重症消化性溃疡出血患者,随机分为对照组(36例)和观察组(37例),其中对照组采取内镜下电凝联合注射康复新治疗,观察组采取内镜下钛夹联合注射康复新治疗。比较两组的临床疗效、并发症发生情况。结果对照组的治疗总有效率为97.2%,与观察组的100.0%差异不明显,无统计学意义(P0.05);对照组的即时止血率为97.2%,略低于观察组的100.0%,两组差异无统计学意义(P0.05);对照组的止血成功率为91.7%,观察组的止血成功率为97.3%,两组对比无明显差异(P0.05);对照组的并发症发生率为2.8%,观察组无并发症发生,两组相比差异不明显,无统计学意义(P0.05);对照组有1例患者电凝止血失败,再用钛夹止血失败后转外科手术治疗,有3例患者在术后出现了不同程度的呕吐,经再次注射康复新后成功止血。观察组有1例患者在术后第4天出现呕血,经再次内镜下检查发现是由于钛夹脱落造成,经钛夹再次治疗后成功止血。结论对重症消化性溃疡出血患者行内镜下电凝或钛夹联合注射康复新治疗均有显著的临床疗效,止血良好,且并发症发生率低、安全性高,在临床上值得推广。     

内镜下金属钛夹保守治疗与药物注射治疗非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的疗效比较

目的比较内镜下金属钛夹保守治疗与药物注射治疗非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的疗效。方法选取宁波市鄞州人民医院消化内科2015年3月至12月共120例非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者为研究对象,其中80例采用内镜下金属钛夹治疗,设为观察组。40例采用内镜下药物注射治疗,设为对照组。比较两组的止血效果、临床症状和体征的改善情况以及并发症等。结果观察组即时止血率、有效止血率高于对照组,72 h后再出血率低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组的外科手术率、病死率低于对照组,但差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组粪便潜血转阴、引流管变清、呕血消失、肠鸣音恢复正常的时间均短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P均0.05)。两组术后均无并发症发生,观察组的住院时间短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论相比于内镜下注射药物治疗,金属钛夹保守治疗上消化道出血具有止血快、再出血率低,临床症状改善较快等特点,是一种安全有效的治疗方法。     

内镜下金属钛夹联合肾上腺素注射治疗Dieulafoy病的疗效观察

目的探讨内镜下金属钛夹联合肾上腺素注射治疗Dieulafoy病的临床疗效。方法收集2007年1月1日-2016年3月31日南京医科大学附属常州第二人民医院内镜下确诊42例Dieulafoy病患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。根据治疗方案不同,分为观察组和对照组,观察组为内镜下金属钛夹联合肾上腺素注射治疗,对照组为内镜下氩离子血浆凝固术联合肾上腺素注射治疗。比较两组首次止血成功率、再发出血率、转手术率之间的差异。结果观察组与对照组在首次止血成功率及转手术率方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);在再发出血率方面比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论内镜下金属钛夹联合肾上腺素注射治疗Dieulafoy病可明显降低再发出血率,可作为内镜下治疗止血的首选方案。     

胃镜下注射肾上腺素联合钛夹治疗急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的临床效果

目的探讨胃镜下注射肾上腺素联合钛夹治疗急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的临床效果,分析其可能的作用机制。方法选择2015年1月至2015年12月收治的急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者92例作为研究对象,采用随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组各46例。对照组给予胃镜下金属钛夹夹闭治疗,观察组给予胃镜下注射肾上腺素(距出血灶3~5 mm处)联合钛夹治疗,比较两组的止血效果、血清内毒素(LPS)和C反应蛋白(CRP)表达水平以及不良反应情况。结果治疗3 d后,观察组血清LPS、CRP表达水平明显低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.01);治疗1周内,观察组再出血率(2.17%)明显低于对照组(15.22%),差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);观察组穿孔、感染、发热、周围循环衰竭等发生率均明显低于对照组,差异均具有统计学意义(P均0.05)。结论胃镜下注射肾上腺素联合钛夹治疗有助于提高急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者的止血效果,减少不良反应,这可能与降低血清LPS和CRP的表达水平有关。     

止血粉与止血夹用于结直肠病变内镜下黏膜切除术中止血及预防再出血的随机对照研究

【摘要】目的探讨止血粉用于结直肠病变内镜下黏膜切除术中创面止血及预防术后再出血的临床效果。方法164例结直肠黏膜及黏膜下病变行EMR治疗患者采用随机数字表法随机分成2组,止血粉组和止血夹组各82例,创面分别给予止血粉和止血夹止血处理和预防性治疗,比较2组术中止血治疗时间、止血成功率、术后再出血和出血发生率、不良反应及创面愈合情况。结果止血粉组和止血夹组术中止血治疗时间分别为64（37—114）S和123（82—234）S,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。止血粉组和止血夹组分别有20例和19例出现术中出血,单独使用止血粉或止血夹止血率分别为90．0％（18／20）和89．5％（17／19）,差异无统计学意义（P=0．677）,两组未能成功止血者分别联合热活检钳或APC均成功止血。术后72h内止血粉组术中出血者术后再出血发生率为25．0％（5／20）,止血夹组为15．8％（3／19）,两组差异无统计学意义（P=0．695）;术后72h内止血粉组术中预防性止血者出血发生率为4．8％（3／62）,止血夹组为9．5％（6／63）,两组差异亦无统计学意义（P=0．491）。两组均未发生严重不良反应,术后随访1个月,结肠镜复查见手术创面愈合好,无再出血发生。结论结直肠病变内镜下黏膜切除术应用止血粉可有效进行创面止血并预防术后再出血,并且较止血夹止血具有操作时间短的优点,可选择作为内镜下的止血方法。     

内镜下硬化止血术治疗非静脉曲张消化道出血的临床研究

目的 观察内镜下硬化止血术对非静脉曲张消化道出血的治疗作用,探讨硬化剂局部注射在非静脉曲张消化道出血治疗中的价值.方法 将92例患者随机分为治疗组及对照组,其中治疗组52例,给予内镜下注射硬化剂;对照组40例,给予内镜下注射1∶10 000肾上腺素.比较两组止血成功率及早期、近期、远期再出血率,并发症发生率及手术率等....     

Efficacy of endoscopic therapy for gastrointestinal bleeding from Dieulafoy's lesion

AIM: To investigate the endoscopic hemostasis for gastrointestinal bleeding due to Dieulafoy’s lesion.METHODS: One hundred and seven patients with gastrointestinal bleeding due to Dieulafoy’s lesion were treated with three endoscopic hemostasis methods: aethoxysklerol injection (46 cases), endoscopic hemoclip hemostasis (31 cases), and a combination of hemoclip hemostasis with aethoxysklerol injection (30 cases).RESULTS: The rates of successful hemostasis using the three methods were 71.7% (33/46), 77.4% (24/31) and 96.7% (29/30), respectively, with significant differences between the methods (P < 0.05). Among those who had unsuccessful treatment with aethoxysklerol injection, 13 were treated with hemoclip hemostasis and 4 underwent surgical operation; 9 cases were successful in the injection therapy. Among the cases with unsuccessful treatment with hemoclip hemostasis, 7 were treated with injection of aethoxysklerol and 3 cases underwent surgical operation; 4 cases were successful in the treatment with hemoclip hemostasis. Only 1 case had unsuccessful treatment with a combined therapy of hemoclip hemostasis and aethoxysklerol injection, and surgery was then performed. No serious complications of perforation occurred in the patients whose bleeding was treated with the endoscopic hemostasis, and no re-bleeding was found during a 1-year follow-up.CONCLUSION: The combined therapy of hemoclip hemostasis with aethoxysklerol injection is the most effective method for gastrointestinal bleeding due to Dieulafoy’s lesion.     

Endoscopic hemostasis for bleeding peptic ulcer using a hemostatic clip or pure ethanol injection

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic hemostasis is frequently chosen as the treatment of first choice for bleeding peptic ulcers. We retrospectively compared the hemostatic effects of hemoclips and endoscopic ethanol injection in patients with bleeding gastric and duodenal ulcers. METHODOLOGY: The subjects were 149 patients with 156 bleeding peptic ulcer lesions who were treated by endoscopic hemostasis, comprising 127 gastric ulcers and 29 duodenal ulcers. Hemoclips were used for 68 lesions (hemoclip group) and ethanol injection was done for 88 lesions (ethanol group). RESULTS: The hemostasis rates were 98.5% for the hemoclip group and 92.0% for the ethanol group. There was no significant difference in hemostatic effect between these two methods. All patients with unsuccessful hemostasis had a visible vessel larger than 2.0 mm in diameter and/or concomitant disease. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that these two endoscopic hemostatic methods are both highly effective. The presence of a large visible vessel may be predictive of unsuccessful hemostasis.     

Endoscopic hemoclip versus triclip placement in patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND: Hemoclip placement is an effective endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer bleeding. Triclip is a novel clipping device with three prongs over the distal end. So far, there is no clinical study concerning the hemostatic effect of triclip placement. AIM: To determine the hemostatic effect of the triclip as compared with that of the hemoclip. METHODS: A total of 100 peptic ulcer patients with active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels received endoscopic therapy with either hemoclip (N = 50) or triclip placement (N = 50). After obtaining initial hemostasis, they received omeprazole 40 mg intravenous infusion every 12 h for 3 days. The main outcome assessment was hemostatic rate and rebleeding rate at 14 days. RESULTS: Initial hemostasis was obtained in 47 patients (94%) of the hemoclip group and in 38 patients (76%) of the triclip group (P= 0.011). Rebleeding episodes, volume of blood transfusion, the hospital stay, numbers of patients requiring urgent operation, and mortality were not statistically different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Hemoclip is superior to triclip in obtaining primary hemostasis in patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding. In bleeders located over difficult-to-approach sites, hemoclip is more ideal than triclip.     

Prospective evaluation of hemoclip application with injection of epinephrine in hypertonic saline solution for hemostasis in unstable patients with shock caused by upper GI bleeding

BACKGROUND: It is difficult to arrest severe upper GI bleeding with any of the available hemostatic modalities in unstable patients who are in shock, and the rates of persistent bleeding and mortality in this group remain high. This prospective study evaluated hemoclip application alone and in combination with injection of hypertonic saline solution with epinephrine in this subgroup of patients with GI bleeding. METHODS: Twenty-two patients in shock because of upper GI bleeding were enrolled and divided into 2 groups based on the response of systolic blood pressure to rapid infusion of 1000 mL of lactated Ringer's solution: an unstable shock group, in which systolic blood pressure did not stabilize at greater than 90 mm Hg, and a stable shock group, in which systolic blood pressure stabilized at greater than 90 mm Hg. Emergency endoscopy was performed in both groups; those in the stable group were treated by hemoclip application alone and those in the unstable group were treated by hemoclip application combined with injection of hypertonic saline solution with epinephrine. The following parameters were compared: vital signs on admission and after infusion of lactated Ringer's solution, hemoglobin concentration, endoscopic classification of type and site of bleeding, number of hemoclips required to arrest bleeding, volume of hypertonic saline solution with epinephrine injected, initial hemostatic rate, rate of recurrent bleeding, the need for additional preventive therapy (hemoclip application), and mortality. RESULTS: The rate of initial hemostasis was 92% in the stable shock group and 100% in the unstable shock group. Bleeding did not recur in either group. The volume of packed red cells transfused and the endotracheal intubation rate were significantly greater in the unstable shock group. Preventive application of hemoclips was performed at endoscopic follow-up 12 times in 10 patients in the stable shock group and 9 times in 7 patients in the unstable shock group. There were no deaths in either group. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic injection of hypertonic saline solution with epinephrine combined with hemoclip application provides effective hemostasis in unstable patients in shock caused by severe upper GI bleeding. The hemostatic result is comparable with that achieved by hemoclip application alone in patients with bleeding but less severe shock.     

Comparison of hemostatic efficacy for epinephrine injection alone and injection combined with hemoclip therapy in treating high-risk bleeding ulcers

BACKGROUND: Rebleeding occurs in 10% to 30% of bleeding ulcer patients receiving endoscopic epinephrine injection therapy. It remains unclear whether addition of a secondary clip therapy following epinephrine injection may reduce the rebleeding rate of high-risk bleeding ulcers. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacies of epinephrine injection alone and epinephrine injection combined with hemoclip therapy in treating high-risk bleeding ulcers. DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A medical center in Taiwan. PATIENTS: One hundred five bleeding ulcer patients with active spurting, oozing, nonbleeding visible vessels or adherent clots in ulcer bases. INTERVENTIONS: Endoscopic combination therapy (n = 52) or diluted epinephrine injection alone (n = 53). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Initial hemostasis rates and recurrent bleeding rates. RESULTS: Initial hemostasis was achieved in 51 patients treated with combination therapy and 49 patients with epinephrine injection therapy (98% vs 92%, P = .18). Bleeding recurred in 2 patients in the combination therapy group and 11 patients in the epinephrine injection group (3.8% vs 21%, P = .008). Among the patients with rebleeding, repeated combination therapy was more effective than repeated injection therapy in achieving permanent hemostasis (100% vs 33%, P = .02). No patient required an emergency operation in the combination therapy group. However, 5 patients in the epinephrine injection group underwent emergency surgery to arrest bleeding (0% vs 9%, P = .023). LIMITATIONS: Treatment outcome of endoscopic hemoclip therapy is related to the techniques of endoscopists. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic combination therapy is superior to epinephrine injection alone in the treatment of high-risk bleeding ulcers.     

A prospective,randomized trial of endoscopic hemoclip versus heater probe thermocoagulation for peptic ulcer bleeding

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic heater probe thermocoagulation and hemoclip are considered to be safe and very effective in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer. So far, there are only few reports concerning hemostasis with endoscopic hemoclip. The aims of this study were to compare the hemostatic effects of both therapeutic modalities in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. METHODS: A total of 80 patients with active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels were randomized to receive endoscopic hemoclip (n = 40) or heater probe thermocoagulation (n = 40). RESULTS: Initial hemostasis was achieved in 34 patients (85%) in the hemoclip group and 40 patients (100%) in the heater probe group (p = 0.01277). Rebleeding occurred in three patients (8.8%) in the hemoclip group and two patients (5%) in the heater probe group (p > 0.1). Among patients with difficult-to-approach bleeding, we obtained a better hemostatic rate in the heater probe group (nine of 11 patients vs three of 10, p = 0.02417). The volume of blood transfused after entry into the study, duration of hospital stay, number of patients requiring urgent surgery, and the mortality rate were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with peptic ulcer bleeding, heater probe thermocoagulation offers an advantage in achieving hemostasis than hemoclip. In difficult-to-approach bleeders, heater probe is a more suitable therapeutic modality.     

钛金属夹与肾上腺素盐水注射法治疗消化性溃疡出血的对照研究

目的对照研究内镜下注射肾上腺素盐水与钛金属夹钳夹法治疗消化性溃疡出血的疗效。方法将68例消化性溃疡出血的病人(男40例,女28例,平均年龄42.62±3.57岁)分成金属夹组(n=35)和注射组(n=33),进行内镜止血治疗。结果两组病例均即时止血,两组的再出血率分别为5.71％(2/35)和9.09％(3/33)(P>0.05),两组治疗相关性并发症发生率分别为0％和42％(14/33)(P<0.01)。结论应用钛金属夹治疗上消化性溃疡出血具有设备简单、疗效好、安全性高、几无并发症等优点,值得推广应用。     

大肠癌术前结肠镜下金属钛夹标记联合腹平片定位的临床研究

目的探讨结肠镜下钛夹标记联合腹部平片在大肠癌术前定位的应用价值。方法 75例大肠癌患者随机分为联合定位组和对照组,所有患者均经手术及病理确诊。联合组结肠镜检查发现结肠肿瘤病灶行活检后在瘤体旁组织放置钛夹标记,镜检结束立即腹平片确定钛夹位置而定位,对照组单纯结肠镜检定位,两组定位结果与手术结果比较。结果大肠癌结肠镜下钛夹标记联合腹部平片定位38例,与手术结果符合率100%;对照组定位37例,与手术结果符合率89.19%,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论钛夹联合腹平片对大肠癌术前定位准确,可为手术切口及术式的选择提供重要的指导作用。