A Preliminary Study Of Influence Of Long-term Drinking On The Perioperative Period Of Pdtients With Esophageal Cancer

ObjectiveEsophageal carcinoma?esophageal carcinoma,EC?ranks eighth in the global incidence rate of malignant tumors,the sixth mortality rate^[1-2],recent studies have shown that the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma has become the United States and Britain,Laws and other Western European countries have the fastest growing malignant tumors^[3].In China,the incidence of esophageal cancer ranks in the forefront of all types of malignant tumors^[4].The incidence of esophageal cancer is the second highest in rural areas^[5].The mortality rate of esophageal cancer in China ranks first in the world.In recent years,the mortality rate of esophageal cancer has declined,but in some high-risk areas of esophageal cancer,there is still a higher incidence and mortality^[6].For the treatment of esophageal cancer,the preferred treatment plan is surgical resection,and the surgical mortality rate gradually decreased,mainly due to advances in surgical and anesthetic techniques,and improved perioperative management experience.According to statistics,the drinking rate of the population in China has shown an increasing trend in recent years^[8],and patients with esophageal cancer have a long history of drinking.Surgical treatment is still the main treatment plan for esophageal cancer.The extent of resection of esophageal cancer should be at least 5-8cm above and below the tumor^[7].Long-term heavy drinking patients with poor liver function,combined with perioperative combat consumption,will inevitably have a serious impact on the patient's postoperative recovery.It can be seen that the long-term drinking history of surgical patients has become an important issue that cannot be ignored.In this study,we analyzed the differences in the indicators of long-term drinking history and non-drinking esophageal cancer patients in the perioperative period to study the effect of long-term drinking on the perioperative period of patients with esophageal cancer,aiming at preoperative preparation and postoperative recovery of esophageal cancer patients.The sexual intervention treatment measures provide the theoretical basis.MethodsThis article used a retrospective analysis,according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria collected 205 cases of long-term alcohol consumption of esophageal cancer patients,according to the daily equivalent of alcohol consumption was divided into:A group of 45 cases,non-drinking patients;B group of 55 cases,low-risk drinking patients Daily alcohol consumption was 1-40 g/day;in group C 60 patients,moderate risk alcoholic patients,daily alcohol consumption was 41-60 g/day;45 patients in group D,high-risk drinking patients,The daily alcohol consumption was>60g^[9].The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,first day postoperative drainage,closed thoracic drainage catheter,intraoperative liver morphology,and postoperative liver were compared between the four groups.The incidence of functional abnormalities,the total incidence of postoperative complications,changes in serum total protein before and after surgery,and the average length of hospital stay were different.Results1.The average operating timeThere was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B?P=0.782?.There was statistical data in group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D,group C and group D.Significance?P?0.05?.2.The average intraoperative blood lossThere was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B?P=0.776?.The data of group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D,group C and group D were statistically significant.Significance?P?0.05?.3.The average postoperative drainage on the first dayThere was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B?P=0.704?.The data of group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D,group C and group D were statistically significant.Significance?P?0.05?.4.The average time for closed thoracic drainage tubeThere was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B?P=0.930?.There was statistical data between group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D,group C and group D.Significance?P?0.05?.5.Intraoperative observation of liver morphology and postoperative liver function abnormalitiesThere was no statistical difference between groups A,B and C.There was no statistical difference between group C and group D.There was a statistical difference between group A and group D,between group B and group D.6.Postoperative complications?anastomotic fistula,pulmonary infection,chylothorax,withdrawal syndrome,etc.?There was no statistical difference between group A and group B.There was no statistical difference between group C and group D.There was statistical difference between group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D.7.Changes in serum total protein before and after surgeryThere was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B?P=0.980?.There were statistical differences between group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D,group C and group D.Significance?P?0.05?.8.The average length of stayThere was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B?P=0.955?.There was statistical data in group A and group C,group A and group D,group B and group C,group B and group D,group C and group D.Significance?P?0.05?.Conclusion1.Low-risk drinking had no significant effect on the average operative time,but when medium-risk drinking was achieved,the average operative time was prolonged as alcohol intake increased.2.Low-risk drinking had no significant effect on the average intraoperative blood loss,but when it reached moderate risk drinking,the average intraoperative blood loss increased with the increase of alcohol intake.3.Low-risk drinking had no significant effect on the drainage volume on the first postoperative day.However,when the medium-risk drinking was achieved,the average daily postoperative drainage volume increased with the increase of alcohol intake.4.Low-risk drinking had no significant effect on the average tube insertion time of the thoracic closed drainage tube,but when the medium-risk drinking was achieved,the average tube insertion time of the thoracic closed drainage tube prolonged with the increase of alcohol intake.5.Low-risk drinking had no significant effect on the change of serum total protein before and after surgery,but when the medium-risk drinking was achieved,the average total serum protein decreased on the first postoperative day compared with the preoperative reduction with the increase of alcohol intake.increase.6.Low-risk drinking had no significant effect on the average length of stay,but when it reached moderate risk drinking,the average length of hospital stay increased with the increase of alcohol intake.7.When drinking alcohol at high risk,the incidence of intraoperative hepatic morphology and postoperative liver function abnormalities was higher than that of non-drinkers and low-risk drinkers.8.When low-risk drinking was performed,the overall incidence of postoperative complications was not significantly different from that of non-drinkers,but after achieving moderate-risk drinking,the overall incidence of postoperative complications was significantly higher than that of non-drinkers.