Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Aug 15, 2025; 17(8): 105267
Published online Aug 15, 2025. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i8.105267
Published online Aug 15, 2025. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i8.105267
Table 1 Comparison of gastrointestinal recovery between the two groups, mean ± SD
Group | Cases | Bowel sound recovery time (hours) | First flatus time (hours) | First defecation time (hours) |
Observation | 49 | 44.69 ± 4.05 | 51.23 ± 5.05 | 72.05 ± 6.78 |
Control | 49 | 49.87 ± 4.11 | 61.78 ± 5.11 | 75.52 ± 6.44 |
t | - | 6.284 | 10.279 | 2.598 |
P value | - | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.011 |
Table 2 Comparison of liver function between the two groups, mean ± SD
Group | Cases | ALT (U/L) | AST (U/L) | TB (μmol/L) | GTT (U/L) | ALB (ng/mL) | |||||
Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | ||
Observation | 49 | 55.14 ± 2.36 | 42.08 ± 2.06 | 76.87 ± 5.22 | 43.14 ± 3.06 | 44.25 ± 2.66 | 22.08 ± 2.14 | 182.56 ± 8.58 | 71.55 ± 5.06 | 29.75 ± 2.55 | 37.56 ± 3.05 |
Control | 49 | 55.37 ± 2.44 | 45.78 ± 2.11 | 76.29 ± 5.40 | 46.78 ± 3.22 | 44.26 ± 2.78 | 26.55 ± 2.30 | 182.43 ± 8.14 | 76.98 ± 5.23 | 29.34 ± 2.40 | 34.66 ± 3.48 |
t | - | 0.474 | 8.783 | 0.541 | 5.736 | 0.018 | 9.960 | 0.077 | 5.223 | 0.820 | 4.387 |
P value | - | 0.636 | < 0.001 | 0.590 | < 0.001 | 0.986 | < 0.001 | 0.939 | < 0.001 | 0.414 | < 0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of tumor marker levels between the two groups, mean ± SD
Group | Cases | CEA (ng/mL) | TK1 (μg/L) | AFP (ng/mL) | CA19-9 (U/mL) | ||||
Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | ||
Observation | 49 | 17.25 ± 1.56 | 6.53 ± 0.88 | 2.77 ± 0.32 | 1.61 ± 0.36 | 15.44 ± 1.55 | 7.58 ± 0.86 | 46.57 ± 4.05 | 33.69 ± 3.06 |
Control | 49 | 17.43 ± 1.22 | 7.26 ± 0.74 | 2.68 ± 0.80 | 1.89 ± 0.40 | 15.29 ± 1.40 | 8.99 ± 0.87 | 46.43 ± 4.22 | 36.78 ± 3.28 |
t | - | 0.636 | 4.444 | 0.731 | 3.642 | 0.503 | 8.068 | 0.168 | 4.822 |
P value | - | 0.526 | < 0.001 | 0.466 | < 0.001 | 0.616 | <0.001 | 0.867 | < 0.001 |
Table 4 Comparison of immune function between the two groups, mean ± SD
Group | Cases | CD4+ (%) | CD8+ (%) | ||
Before | After | Before | After | ||
Observation | 49 | 25.43 ± 1.66 | 28.98 ± 1.15 | 37.56 ± 1.26 | 31.25 ± 1.02 |
Control | 49 | 25.38 ± 1.40 | 27.16 ± 1.44 | 37.29 ± 1.33 | 33.77 ± 1.20 |
t | - | 0.161 | 6.913 | 1.032 | 11.201 |
P value | - | 0.872 | < 0.001 | 0.305 | < 0.001 |
Table 5 Comparison of the two groups, n (%)
Group | Cases | Allergic reaction | Bleeding | Rash | Abdominal pain | Total incidence |
Observation | 49 | 1 (2.04) | 1 (2.04) | 1 (2.04) | 2 (4.08) | 5 (10.20) |
Control | 49 | 1 (2.04) | 0 (0.00) | 0 (0.00) | 1 (2.04) | 2 (4.08) |
χ2 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.615 |
P value | - | - | - | - | - | 0.433 |
- Citation: Luo TT, Dong MY, Zhao S, Zhai XZ. Effects of the support system combined with Chinese medicine on postoperative gastrointestinal recovery in patients with liver cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2025; 17(8): 105267
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v17/i8/105267.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v17.i8.105267