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 ›› 2016, Vol. 05 ›› Issue (01) : 33 -39. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2016.01.07

所属专题: 文献

论著

经肛门微创手术治疗直肠肿瘤的可行性分析
徐永鹏1, 王锡山2,()   
  1. 1. 150086 哈尔滨医科大学附属肿瘤医院泌尿外科
    2. 100021 北京,中国医学科学院 北京协和医学院肿瘤医院结直肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2015-01-16 出版日期:2016-02-25
  • 通信作者: 王锡山
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(81272706)

The feasibility analysis of tranasnal minimally invasive surgical treatment for rectal cancer

Yongpeng Xu1, Xishan Wang2,()   

  1. 1. Department of Urinary Surgery, The Cancer Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150086, China
    2. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
  • Received:2015-01-16 Published:2016-02-25
  • Corresponding author: Xishan Wang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Wang Xishan, Email:
引用本文:

徐永鹏, 王锡山. 经肛门微创手术治疗直肠肿瘤的可行性分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2016, 05(01): 33-39.

Yongpeng Xu, Xishan Wang. The feasibility analysis of tranasnal minimally invasive surgical treatment for rectal cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2016, 05(01): 33-39.

目的

评价经肛门微创手术(transanal minimally invasive surgery,TAMIS)临床疗效,以期为患者提供更好的手术方式选择。

方法

回顾性分析2012年7月至2014年9月间在哈尔滨医科大学附属第二医院结直肠肿瘤外科接受直肠肿物局部切除术患者52例,其中TAMIS组30例,传统经肛门切除组(TAE)22例,对患者进行系统随访,并详细记录其临床资料。

结果

TAMIS组手术患者平均手术时间41.5(25~90)分钟。平均住院时间3(1~4)天。SILS Port平均安装时间3(1~5)分钟,TAE组手术患者平均手术时间55(25~110)分钟。平均住院时间3(1~4)天。52例患者手术均获得完整切除,未见切缘阳性患者。共发生术后短期内肛门括约肌功能异常1例,术后尿潴留1例,术后肛门出血1例。两组患者肿物距离肛缘距离方面差异有显著的统计学意义,TAMIS术能够获得更为广泛的手术范围;TAMIS组手术时间更短(41.5分钟,P<0.05);在肛门功能影响方面,TAMIS组患者便失禁严重程度评分下降明显(P=0.002),肛门功能恢复良好;患者术后疼痛强度评分低于TAE手术组(P=0.001),经过数学分析得到TAMIS曲线公式为Y=-13.15ln(x)+79.563。根据手术时间二次求导曲线图,第12例为拐点,提示前12例为学习阶段。

结论

经肛门微创可通过常规腹腔镜器械完成,手术学习曲线平滑,易于掌握,肛门功能损伤小,术后疼痛轻微,手术范围广,术野清晰,在直肠良性肿物或早期直肠癌的局部切除中具有良好的疗效。

Objective

To evaluate the clinical curative effect of the transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), is aiming to provide a better surgical procedure for patients.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of 52 cases of patients with colorectal neoplasm local resection from July 2012 to September 2014 in the department of colorectal surgery of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University. 30 cases were TAMIS group, 22 cases were TAE group. All the patients were followed up, and recorded detail clinical data.

Results

In TAMIS group, the average operation time was 41.5 minutes (25~90), the average length of hospital stay was 3 days (1~4), and setup time of SILS Port was 3 minutes on average (1~5). The average operation time of TAE group was 55 minutes (25~110), and the average length of hospital stay was 3 days (1~4). 52 cases were obtained complete resection, with no positive cut edge. Of all the patients, 1 case was with anal sphincter dysfunction, 1 case was with urinary retention shortly after the postoperation, 1 case was with postoperative anal bleeding. The difference of distance from neoplasm to anal edge was of statistical significance in two groups of patients, TAMIS technique can get wider operation range, and TAMIS group has shorter operation time (41.5 minutes, P<0.05); In terms of anal function, the score of fecal incontinence in TAMIS group was significantly decreased (P=0.002), anal function recovered well; The intensity score of postoperative pain was lower than TAE group (P=0.001), TAMIS curve formula was Y=-13.15 ln (x)+ 79.563 after mathematical analysis. According to operation time, the 12th case was inflection point in the second derivative curve, indicating the previous 12 cases were the learning phase.

Conclusions

Transanal minimally invasive surgery can be finished by conventional laparoscopic instruments, the learning curve is smooth, and easy to master, with smaller anus function damage, mild postoperative pain, wide scope of operation and clear operation field, which was of good curative effect in the treatment of benign neoplasm or local excision of early rectal cancer.

表1 TAMIS组与TAE组患者的临床资料表
图1 TAMIS学习曲线对数函数模型
图2 TAMIS学习曲线二次求导曲线
图3 患者FISI评分
图4 TAMIS患者FISI评分变化
图5 TAE患者FISI评分
[1]
Sajid MS, Bhatti MI, Baig M, et al. Use of transanal minimally invasive surgery for endoscopic resection of rectal tumour: a technical note. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf), 2015, 3(3): 266-267.
[2]
Atallah S, Martin-Perez B, Pinan J, et al. Robotic transanal total mesorectal excision: a pilot study. Tech Coloproctol, 2014, 18(11): 1047-1053.
[3]
Atallah S, Martin-Perez B, Albert M, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision (TAMIS-TME): results and experience with the first 20 patients undergoing curative-intent rectal cancer surgery at a single institution. Tech Coloproctol, 2014, 18(5): 473-480.
[4]
Rimonda R, Arezzo A, Arolfo S, et al. TransAnal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) with SILSTM port versus Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM): a comparative experimental study. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(10): 3762-3768.
[5]
Albert MR, Atallah SB, deBeche-Adams TC, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for local excision of benign neoplasms and early-stage rectal cancer: efficacy and outcomes in the first 50 patients. Dis Colon Rectum, 2013, 56(3): 301-307.
[6]
Silveira Mendes CR, Miranda Ferreira LS, Aguiar Sapucaia R, et al. Transanal minimally-invasive surgery (TAMIS): technique and results from an initial experience. J Coloproctol, 2013, 33(4): 191-195.
[7]
Hakiman H, Pendola M, Fleshman JW. Replacing Transanal Excision with Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery and/or Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for Early Rectal Cancer. Clin Colon Rectal Surg, 2015, 28(1): 38-42.
[8]
McLemore EC, Weston LA, Coker AM, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for benig and malignant rectal neoplasia. Am J Surg, 2014, 208(3): 372-381.
[9]
Atallah S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol, 2014, 23(1): 10-16.
[10]
Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward. Surg Endosc. 2010, 24(9): 2200-2205.
[11]
Slack T, Wong S, Muhlmann M. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: an initial experience. ANZ J Surg, 2014, 84 (3): 177-180.
[12]
Corman′s Textbook of Colorectal Surgery (2012) 6th Edition. Laparoscopic Colon and Rectal Surgery: Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery. Chapter 19: 594-595.
[13]
Hayashi S, Takayama T, Yamagata M,et al. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery used to perform transanal endoscopic microsurgery (SILSTEM) for T1 rectal cancer under spinal anesthesia: report of a case. Surg Today. 2013 Mar; 43(3): 325-328.
[1] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[2] 吴晖, 佴永军, 施雪松, 魏晓为. 两种解剖入路下行直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 40-43.
[3] 周世振, 朱兴亚, 袁庆港, 刘理想, 王凯, 缪骥, 丁超, 汪灏, 管文贤. 吲哚菁绿荧光成像技术在腹腔镜直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫中的应用效果分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 44-47.
[4] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[5] 李代勤, 刘佩杰. 动态增强磁共振评估中晚期低位直肠癌同步放化疗后疗效及预后的价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 100-103.
[6] 庄宝雄, 邓海军. 单孔+1腹腔镜直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 601-601.
[7] 郑民华, 蒋天宇, 赵轩, 马君俊. 中国腹腔镜直肠癌根治术30年发展历程与未来[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 591-595.
[8] 池畔, 黄胜辉. 中国腹腔镜直肠癌根治术30年来的巨大进步[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 596-600.
[9] 李明, 屠松, 闫鹏, 钱军, 高鹏程, 许文山, 杨发英, 胡振涛, 单永玮. 应用前列腺电切镜引导置管治疗直肠低位吻合口漏研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 603-606.
[10] 李玲, 刘亚, 李培玲, 张秀敏, 李萍. 直肠癌患者术后肠道菌群的变化与抑郁症相关性研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 607-610.
[11] 赵梓竣, 兰运升. 改良一针法末端回肠造口术对低位直肠癌保肛术后应激反应及安全性的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 611-614.
[12] 吴胜伟, 王志伟, 陈贵进, 刘序, 吴晓翔. 系膜肥厚低位直肠癌患者改良NOSES Ⅰ式手术的临床效果评价[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 615-618.
[13] 严虹霞, 王晓娟, 张毅勋. 2 型糖尿病对结直肠癌患者肿瘤标记物、临床病理及预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 483-487.
[14] 赵磊, 刘文志, 林峰, 于剑, 孙铭骏, 崔佑刚, 张旭, 衣宇鹏, 于宝胜, 冯宁. 深部热疗在改善结直肠癌术后辅助化疗副反应及生活质量中的作用研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 488-493.
[15] 陈杰, 武明胜, 李一金, 李虎, 向源楚, 荣新奇, 彭健. 低位直肠癌冷冻治疗临床初步分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 494-498.
阅读次数
全文


摘要