2种支架治疗梗阻性结直肠癌疗效对比分析

Comparison of safety and efficacy between two types of self-expanding metallic stent in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer

摘要:

目的： 比较2种自膨式金属支架在梗阻性结直肠癌过渡治疗的安全性和效果。方法： 收集2015年4月至2019年11月于重庆医科大学附属第一医院就诊的梗阻性结直肠癌并于结肠镜下置入支架的患者70例（2组分别为40例和30例）。分析一期手术率、支架置入成功率、临床缓解率和并发症发生率。结果： 一期手术率为61.43%（70%vs.50%，P=0.089）、置入成功率和临床缓解率分别为95.7%（95%vs.96.7%，P=1.000）和94.3%（92.5%vs.96.7%，P=0.824），并发症发生率为7.14%（10%vs.3.33%，P=0.547）。结论： 支架置入作为梗阻性结直肠癌术前过渡治疗，是一种安全、有效的方式，2种支架在有效性和安全性方面差异无统计学意义。

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of two types of self-expanding metallic stent (the Micro-tech type and the Boston Scientific type) as a bridge to surgery in obstructive colorectal cancer retrospectively. Methods: Data of 70 patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, in which 40 patients were in the group of Micro-tech type and 30 ones were in the group of Boston Scientific type respectively, were collected. All the patients were underwent stenting under colonoscopy from April 2015 to November 2019. The rates of complications, clinical remission, stenting success, and one-stage surgery were compared between the two groups. Results: No significant differences were found between both stents in the rates of stenting and clinical remission success. The total stenting and clinical remission success rates were 95.7% (95%vs.96.7%, P=1.000) and 94.3% (92.5%vs.96.7%, P=0.824), respectively. The overall rate of complications was 7.14%. There was no significant difference (P=0.547) between the two groups, although a higher rate of complications was found in the group of Micro-tech type when compared with the group of Boston Scientific type (10%vs.3.33%). Regarding the one-stage surgery, the overall rate was 61.43%. The rate of one-stage surgery in Micro-tech type group was higher than the one in Boston Scientific type group (70%vs.50%), but there was no significant difference (P=0.089). Conclusion: As a bridge to surgery, the placement of self-expanding metallic stent was safe and effective. There was no significant difference in short-term safety and efficacy between the two type of stents in our study.