Comparison Of The Effect Of Different Nutritional Support In Laparoscopic Radical Resection Of Rectal Cancer

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of different nutritional support regimens after radical resection of rectal cancer.Methods: Research and analysis of Guilin medical college second affiliated hospital gastrointestinal surgery in October 2017 to August 2019 preoperative nutritional risk screening of colorectal cancer patients,and line of laparoscopic colorectal cancer radical surgery using total parenteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition combined single enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition combined personalized enteral nutrition 120 cases with three sets of data,Collection of preoperative and postoperative days 1,3,5 clinical indicators propagated(albumin ALB,prealbumin PA,leukocyte WBC,total lymphocyte TLC),NRS score,postoperative complications(pulmonary infection,anastomotic fistula,infection of incision,diarrhea,intestinal obstruction),intestinal function recovery time(d),length of hospital stay after surgery(d),hospitalization expenses(y)data,such as through single factor analysis of variance comparing the clinical application value.Results:(1)The nutritional indexes(ALB,PA)and immune indexes(WBC,TLC)of combined nutrition group B were better than those of combined nutrition group A and potential nutrition group(P < 0.05);(2): The time of first exhaust and defecation in combination nutrition group B was faster than that in combination nutrition group A and potential nutrition group(P < 0.05);(3): The complication rate,hospital stay and hospital expenses of combined nutrition group B were lower than those of combined nutrition group A and parenteral nutrition group(P < 0.05).Conclusion: Parenteral nutrition combined with individualized enteral nutrition in proportion can help to restore the nutritional status and reduce the inflammatory response after rectal cancer surgery,reduce postoperative complications and promote postoperative rehabilitation.Patients with low nutritional risk have better postoperative clinical outcomes than patients with high risk.