Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Cases. Aug 26, 2022; 10(24): 8547-8555
Published online Aug 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i24.8547
Published online Aug 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i24.8547
Table 2 Comparison of surgical process indicators between the two groups (mean ± SD)
| Index | Research group (n = 44) | Control group (n = 44) | t value | P value |
| Operation time (min) | 273.0 ± 24.8 | 256.3 ± 28.5 | 2.932 | 0.004 |
| Incision length (cm) | 25.98 ± 1.55 | 26.14 ± 1.64 | -0.470 | 0.639 |
| Surgical bleeding (mL) | 626.9 ± 105.1 | 598.4 ± 97.0 | 1.322 | 0.190 |
| Portal block time (min) | 25.3 ± 4.1 | 23.5 ± 4.5 | 1.961 | 0.053 |
| Postoperative anal exhaust time (h) | 50.0 ± 9.7 | 55.1 ± 10.4 | -2.379 | 0.020 |
| Drainage tube indwelling time (d) | 3.84 ± 0.66 | 3.62 ± 0.71 | 1.505 | 0.136 |
| Hospital stay (d) | 13.6 ± 1.8 | 14.0 ± 2.2 | -0.933 | 0.353 |
- Citation: Liu D, Fang JM, Chen XQ. Clinical significance of half-hepatic blood flow occlusion technology in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with cirrhosis. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(24): 8547-8555
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v10/i24/8547.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i24.8547