比较尾侧入路与中间入路腹腔镜辅助下右半结肠癌根治术的近期临床疗效，探讨尾侧入路右半结肠癌根治术的安全性、可行性及实用性。

选择2016年1月至2018年1月就诊于蚌埠医学院第一附属医院的88例右半结肠癌患者资料，随机分为尾侧入路组及中间入路组，各44例，进行不同入路的腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术。对比两组患者手术相关指标以及术后恢复情况、并发症发生率。

尾侧入路组的手术时间为（112.7±42.1）min，术中出血量为（51.7±4.8）ml，显著少于中间入路组的（130.5±37.2）min、（72.3±5.6）ml；差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。而两组在阳性淋巴结数目、中转开腹率、拔管时间、术后引流量、肛门排气排便时间、术后住院时间以及术后并发症方面，差异无统计学意义。

尾侧入路法行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术更加安全、有效，可缩短手术时间、减少手术出血，更易于外科医师掌握，值得在临床上推广应用。

To compare the short-term therapeutic effects of the caudal and medial approaches for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

The clinical data of eighty-eight patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in the First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College from January 2016 to January 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the surgical operation, the patients were divided into caudal approach group with 44 patients, and medial approach group with 44 patients. Relevant indexes of operation, recovery rate and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups.

The operative time and intraoperative blood loss in the caudal approach group were (112.7±42.1) min and (51.7±4.8) ml, significantly less than (130.5±37.2) min and (72.3±5.6) mlin the medial approach group, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the number of positive lymph nodes, conversion rate, time of extubation, postoperative drainage volume, time of anal exhaust and defecation, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative complications between the two groups.

The caudal approach for laparoscopic radical resection of right colon cancer is safe, effective, easy to master, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.