切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2014, Vol. 03 ›› Issue (04) : 257 -260. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2014.04.07

所属专题: 文献

论著

手辅助腹腔镜与传统开腹直肠癌根治术的对比研究
朱玉萍1, 冯海洋1, 刘卓1, 付志璇1, 李德川1,()   
  1. 1. 310022 杭州,浙江省肿瘤医院结直肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2014-07-16 出版日期:2014-08-25
  • 通信作者: 李德川
  • 基金资助:
    浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(2011ZHA002,2013KYB046); 国家自然科学基金(81372210)

Comparison of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery andlaparotomy approach in curative resection of rectal carcinoma

Yu-ping ZHU1, Hai-yang FENG1, Zhuo LIU1, Zhi-xuan FU1, De-chuan LI1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Colorectal Cancer Surgery, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou 310012, China
  • Received:2014-07-16 Published:2014-08-25
  • Corresponding author: De-chuan LI
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: LI De-chuan, Email:
引用本文:

朱玉萍, 冯海洋, 刘卓, 付志璇, 李德川. 手辅助腹腔镜与传统开腹直肠癌根治术的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2014, 03(04): 257-260.

Yu-ping ZHU, Hai-yang FENG, Zhuo LIU, Zhi-xuan FU, De-chuan LI. Comparison of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery andlaparotomy approach in curative resection of rectal carcinoma[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2014, 03(04): 257-260.

目的

通过手辅助腹腔镜与开腹下直肠癌根治术的对比研究,评估手辅助腹腔镜在直肠癌根治手术中应用的优劣。

方法

对本院103例接受手辅助腹腔镜和开腹手术的直肠癌患者的基本临床资料、手术切口、术中出血、手术时间、术后恢复、病理结果、近期疗效等进行统计学分析。

结果

两组患者的基本临床资料无统计学差异,手辅助腹腔镜组的手术切口长度、手术出血量、术后住院天数、术后镇痛、术后排气时间等方面明显优于开腹组,两组在手术时间、术后并发症发生率等方面无统计学差异。术后两组患者平均随访26个月,各自出现2例远处转移及复发,无切口种植情况。

结论

手辅助腹腔镜直肠癌根治术是安全的微创手术方式,具有住院时间短、进食及肠道功能恢复快,疼痛减轻,出血量较少,手术彻底性良好的特点。

Objective

This prospective, randomized study compared the outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery(HALS)with laparotomy approach resection of rectal carcionma.

Methods

103 cases of rectal cancer patients received HALS and laparotomy approach surgery.The main outcome measures were the distance of tumor to anus, procedure time, blood loss, length of abdominal incision, post-operative abdominal drainage, return function, length of hospital stay, morbidity and pathology results.

Results

General status and the histopathological features of tumours were similar in two groups.Length of abdominal incision, surgical blood loss, post-operative hospital stay length, mean duration of narcotic analgesia, time to first passing flatus, and postoperative venous high nutrition application were better in HALS than open approach surgery.Procedure times and post-operative morbidity were similar in two groups.At a median follow-up of 26 months, two recurrence cases occurred in each group.

Conclusion

In this study, the HALS for curative resection of rectal carcinoma was safe and effective and may offer several potential advantages to patients in their post-operative recovery.

表1 两组患者基本临床资料情况表
表2 手术相关指标情况表
表3 术后观察指标情况表
[1]
Pendlimari R,Holubar SD,Pattan-Arun J, et al.Hand-assisted laparoscopic colon and rectal cancer surgery:feasibility, short-term, and oncological outcomes.Surgery, 2010, 148(2): 378-385.
[2]
Dols LF,Kok NF,Ijzermans JN.Live donor nephrectomy:A review of evidence for surgical techniques.Transpl Int, 2010, 23: 121-130.
[3]
Baik SH,Gincherman M,Mutch MG, et al.Laparoscopic vs open resection for patients with rectal cancer:comparison of perioperative outcomes and long-term survival.Dis Colon Rectum, 2011, 54(1): 6-14.
[4]
Braga M,Vignali A,Gianotti L, et al.Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery:a randomized trial on short-term outcome.Ann Surg, 2002, 236: 759-66.
[5]
Schirmer BD.Laparoscopic colon resection.Surg Clin North Am, 1996, 76: 571-583.
[6]
Tekkis PP,Senagore AJ,Delaney CP, et al.Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery:comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections.Ann Surg, 2005, 242: 83-91.
[7]
Liu FL,Lin JJ,Ye F, et al.Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus the open approach in curative resection of rectal cancer.J Int Med Res, 2010, 38: 916-922.
[8]
Meshikhes AW,El Tair M,Al Ghazal T. Hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery:initial experience of a single surgeon.Saudi J Gastroenterol, 2011, 17(1): 16-19.
[9]
Samalavicius NE,Gupta RK,Dulskas A, et al.Clinical outcomes of 103 hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries for left-sided colon and rectal cancer:single institutional review.Ann Coloproctol, 2013, 29(6): 225-230.
[1] 燕速, 霍博文. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治性切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 13-13.
[2] 母德安, 李凯, 张志远, 张伟. 超微创器械辅助单孔腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 14-14.
[3] 李国新, 陈新华. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术食管空肠吻合的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-4.
[4] 李子禹, 卢信星, 李双喜, 陕飞. 食管胃结合部腺癌腹腔镜手术重建方式的选择[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 5-8.
[5] 李乐平, 张荣华, 商亮. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治淋巴结清扫策略[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 9-12.
[6] 陈方鹏, 杨大伟, 金从稳. 腹腔镜近端胃癌切除术联合改良食管胃吻合术重建His角对术后反流性食管炎的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 15-18.
[7] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[8] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[9] 任佳, 马胜辉, 王馨, 石秀霞, 蔡淑云. 腹腔镜全胃切除、间置空肠代胃术的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 31-34.
[10] 王庆亮, 党兮, 师凯, 刘波. 腹腔镜联合胆道子镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 313-313.
[11] 杨建辉, 段文斌, 马忠志, 卿宇豪. 腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 314-314.
[12] 叶劲松, 刘驳强, 柳胜君, 吴浩然. 腹腔镜肝Ⅶ+Ⅷ段背侧段切除[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 315-315.
[13] 郭兵, 王万里, 何凯, 黄汉生. 腹腔镜下肝门部胆管癌根治术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 143-143.
[14] 李凯, 陈淋, 苏怀东, 向涵, 张伟. 超微创器械在改良单孔腹腔镜巨大肝囊肿开窗引流及胆囊切除中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 144-144.
[15] 魏丽霞, 张安澜, 周宝勇, 李明. 腹腔镜下Ⅲb型肝门部胆管癌根治术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 145-145.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?