Objective: To compare the efficacy, advantages and disadvantages of endoscopic CO2 laser cauterization (ECLC) and open neck surgery in the treatment of congenital pyriform sinus fistula (CPSF). Methods: From September 2014 to March 2017, 80 cases with confirmed diagnosis of CPSF received initial treatment at Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital were prospectively analyzed, including 34 males and 46 females, aged 18 to 672 (194.17±141.18) months. They were consecutively divided into endoscopic group and open-surgery group, with 40 cases in each group. Both groups of patients received surgical treatment under general anesthesia. The endoscopic group was treated by endoscopic CO2 laser cauterization, and the open-surgery group underwent the following surgery: first, we performed suspension laryngoscopy examination to confirm the presence of fistula in the bottom of the piriform fossa, then open-neck resection of congenital piriform sinus fistula with recurrent laryngeal nerve and/or lateral branch of superior laryngeal nerve anatomy plus partial thyroidectomy were performed. The data between the two groups were compared, including the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, average length of stay, neck cosmetic scores, complications and cure rates. All patients were followed up in outpatient clinics. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0 software. P<0.05 indicates that the difference is statistically significant. Results: All patients were successfully completed the operation. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain and average length of hospital stay in the endoscopic group were significantly less than those in the open group [(27.4±5.5) min to (105.8±52.5) min, (0.6±0.5) ml to (33.6±41.5) ml, (1.7±0.9) points to (4.6±0.7) points, (5.9±2.9)d to(8.9±3.3)d, t values were-9.400, -5.031, -16.199, -4.293, P values were all<0.01]; The neck cosmetic score in the endoscopy group was significantly greater than that of the open group [(9.9±0.4) against (5.8±0.9) points, t=25.847, P<0.01]. Compared with the open group (15.0%, 6/40), the complication rate of the endoscopic group (7.5%, 3/40) was not statistically significant (χ²=0.50, P>0.05). Three months after the first treatment, the cure rate in the endoscopic group (82.5%, 33/40) was significantly lower than that in the open-neck group (100.0%, 40/40), χ²=5.64, P<0.05. The follow-up time was 12 months after the last treatment. Eighty cases were followed up and none was lost to follow-up. During the follow-up period, the cure rate of the endoscopy group (97.5%, 39/40) was compared with that of the open group (100.0%, 40/40), and the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: In the treatment of CPSF, the two-surgical method each has their advantages. Compared with open-neck surgery, ECLC is simpler, repeatable. ECLC has shorter time in operation and hospital stay, less complications, and less postoperative pain and more precise cosmetic results. It could be preferred for the initial treatment of CPSF and relapsed cases after cauterization. But subject to relatively low cure rate of one-time cauterization and uncertain long-term efficacy, it cannot completely replace the open-neck surgery at present.
目的： 对比评价内镜CO2激光烧灼术（endoscopic CO2 laser cauterization， ECLC）及颈部开放术式治疗先天性梨状窝瘘（congenital pyriform sinus fistula， CPSF）的疗效及利弊。 方法： 前瞻性分析2014年9月至2017年3月于广东省人民医院接受手术治疗的80例初治CPSF患者的病例资料，其中男34例，女46例，年龄18~672（194.17±141.18）个月。采用连续入组方式分为内镜组和开放组，每组各40例。两组患者均在全身麻醉下接受手术治疗。内镜组采取ECLC术式，开放组采取颈部开放术式（支撑喉镜检查+梨状窝瘘瘘管切除+喉返神经解剖+/-喉上神经外侧支解剖+甲状腺腺叶部分切除术）。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后疼痛程度、平均住院日、颈部美容评分，并对比并发症发生率和治愈率。对所有患者进行门诊随访。采用SPSS 20.0软件进行统计学分析。P<O.05为差异有统计学意义。 结果： 所有患者均顺利完成手术。内镜组手术时间、术中出血量、术后疼痛程度、平均住院日均小于开放组 ［（27.4±5.5） min对（105.8±52.5）min，（0.6±0.5） ml对（33.6±41.5）ml，（1.7±0.9）分对（4.6±0.7）分，（5.9±2.9）d对（8.9±3.3）d，t值分别为-9.400，-5.031，-16.199，-4.293，P值均<0.01］；内镜组颈部美容评分大于开放组［（9.9±0.4）分对（5.8±0.9）分，t=25.847， P<0.01］。内镜组并发症发生率（7.5%，3/40）与开放组（15.0%，6/40）比较，差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.50， P>0.05）。首次治疗后3个月，内镜组治愈率（82.5%，33/40）明显低于开放组（100.0%，40/40），χ²=5.64， P<0.05。随访时间为末次治疗后12个月，完成随访80例，失访0例。随访期间内镜组的治愈率（97.5%，39/40）与开放组（100.0%，40/40）比较，差异无统计学意义。 结论： 两种术式各有利弊，与颈部开放术式比较，ECLC操作简单、可重复操作、术时短、住院周期短、并发症少、术后疼痛轻、美容效果确切，可作为初治和烧灼后复发CPSF治疗的首选。但ECLC受制于一次烧灼闭合率偏低、闭合后可能复发的风险，现阶段仍无法完全取代颈部开放术式。.