切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华结直肠疾病电子杂志

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 07 ›› Issue (05) : 447 -452. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2018.05.008

所属专题： 文献；

论著

腹腔镜下"无管化"结直肠手术的临床研究
郑立君1, 胡臻2, 常涛2, 蒋逊1, 卢列盛1, 王峰1, 刘忠臣,1   
  1. 1. 200072　上海市第十人民医院胃肠外科
    2. 200072　上海市第十人民医院麻醉科
  • 收稿日期:2017-12-27 出版日期:2018-10-25
  • 通信作者: 刘忠臣

Clinical study of laparoscopic ″tube-free″ colorectal surgery

Lijun Zheng1, Zhen Hu2, Tao Chang2, Xun Jiang1, Liesheng Lu1, Feng Wang1, Zhongchen Liu,1   

  1. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shanghai Tenth People′s Hospital, Shanghai 200072, China
    2. Department of Anaesthesia, Shanghai Tenth People′s Hospital, Shanghai 200072, China
  • Received:2017-12-27 Published:2018-10-25
  • Corresponding author: Zhongchen Liu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Liu Zhongchen, Email:
全文 ( 0 ) 下载PDF ( 1 ) 导出引用
引用本文：

郑立君, 胡臻, 常涛, 蒋逊, 卢列盛, 王峰, 刘忠臣. 腹腔镜下"无管化"结直肠手术的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2018, 07(05): 447-452.

Lijun Zheng, Zhen Hu, Tao Chang, Xun Jiang, Liesheng Lu, Feng Wang, Zhongchen Liu. Clinical study of laparoscopic ″tube-free″ colorectal surgery[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2018, 07(05): 447-452.

目的

通过改善围手术期处理实现腹腔镜下结直肠手术"无管化"；将腹腔镜下"无管化"结直肠手术与传统术后留置鼻胃管、腹腔引流管和导尿管腹腔镜下的结直肠手术在术后恢复和并发症方面进行对照研究，进一步论证腹腔镜下"无管化"结直肠手术的可行性和安全性。

方法

将49例结、直肠恶性肿瘤患者随机分为常规留置"三管"手术组（对照组）（23例）、"无管化"手术组（TF组）（26例）。比较患者基线特征指标、术后恢复指标、生活质量量表（QoR-40）评估、术后安全性指标。

结果

"无管化"手术组有3人术后发生尿潴留；"无管化"手术组与对照组相比，其术后阿片类镇痛药物的使用天数（Z=5.241，P<0.001）和住院天数明显缩短（t=3.21，P=0.002），差异均有统计学意义。两组患者在吻合口漏、肠梗阻、切口感染、肺部感染、心力衰竭、深静脉血栓和心脑血管意外等并发症的发生率方面差异无明显统计学意义（均P>0.05）。"无管化"手术组术后48 h QoR-40总分明显高于对照组（Z=5.774，P<0.01）；其中"无管化"手术组在身体舒适度、自理能力和疼痛方面的评分明显优于对照组（P<0.01）。

结论

在结直肠手术后常规留置鼻胃管、导尿管和腹腔引流管并不能使患者获益；而"无管化"结直肠手术通过减少患者术后不适，明显改善患者术后恢复质量，且不增加术后短期并发症的发生；是一种安全、可行的治疗措施。

关键词: 结直肠肿瘤, 腹腔镜, 鼻胃管, 腹腔引流, 导尿管
Objective

To achieve ″tube-free″ by improving the perioperative management of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The laparoscopic ″tube-free″ colorectal surgery and conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery which indwelled nasogastric tube, peritoneal drainage tube and urinary catheter postoperative were compared in the postoperative recovery and complications to proof the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic ″tube-free″ colorectal surgery.

Methods

Forty-nine patients with colorectal cancer were randomly divided into conventional indwelling three tube operation group (control group) (twenty-three cases) and "tube-free" operation group (TF group) (twenty-six cases). The baseline characteristics of the patients, the postoperative recovery index, 40-item quality of recovery scoring system (QoR-40) assessment and the postoperative safety index were compared.

Results

There were three patients who had postoperative urinary retention in the TF group. The postoperative days of opioid analgesics (Z=5.241, P<0.001) and days of hospitalization (t=3.2, P=0.002) in the TF group were significantly shorter than those in the control group. The difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications such as anastomotic leakage, intestinal obstruction, wound infection, pulmonary infection, heart failure, deep vein thrombosis and cardio cerebral vascular accident between the two groups (P>0.05). The total score of QoR-40 at forty-eight hours after operation in the TF group was significantly higher than that in the control group (Z=5.774, P<0.01), and the sub-score of comfort, self-care and pain in the TF group was significantly better than that in the control group (P<0.01).

Conclusion

Conventional indwelling nasogastric tube, catheter and drainage tube after colorectal surgery does not benefit the patients. Laparoscopic ″tube-free″ colorectal surgery which reduces postoperative discomfort, improves patient quality recovery after operation without increasing the occurrence of short-term postoperative complications is a safe and feasible treatment measures.

Key words: Colorectal neoplasms, Laparoscopes, Nasogastric tube, Abdominal drainage, Indwelling catheterization
表1 两组患者的一般资料（基线数据）比较（±s）
组别 纳入人数（n） 性别 年龄（岁） ASA分级 肿瘤部位
男性 女性 ? Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ 回盲部 升结肠 横结肠 降结肠 乙状结肠 直肠
对照组 23 12 11 58.17±10.62 9 11 3 0 2 6 1 2 6 6
"无管化"手术组 26 15 11 61.04±9.78 13 10 3 0 3 6 2 2 6 7
t值/χ2值 ? 0.150 0.983 0.593 0.428
P值 ? 0.698 0.331 0.743 0.995
组别 TMN分期 手术类型 CCI
Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ 右半结肠切除术 横结肠切除术 左半结肠切除术 乙状结肠癌根治术 直肠癌根治术 0 1 2 3 4
对照组 1 10 12 8 1 2 6 6 10 6 6 1 0
"无管化"手术组 2 10 14 9 2 2 6 7 10 10 3 2 1
t值/χ2值 0.593 0.428 3.162
P值 0.743 0.995 0.531
表2 两组患者术后恢复相关指标的比较（±s）
组别 例数（n） 术后导尿管留置（d） 术后鼻胃管留置（d） 术后首次排气时间（h） 术后首次进食流质（d） 术后首次排便时间（d） 术后阿片类镇痛药物使用（d） 术后住院天数（d）
对照组 23 2.78±0.90 2.43±0.59 36.52±10.21 2.86±0.97 3.73±1.29 2（1~4） 7.61±1.59
"无管化"手术组 26 0.38±1.10 0 33.80±11.06 2.58±0.86 3.50±1.14 0（0~3） 6.12±1.66
t值/Z值 ? 8.28 21.08 0.889 1.123 0.690 5.241 3.210
P值 ? <0.001 <0.001 0.379 0.267 0.494 <0.001 0.002
表3 两组患者术后安全性指标的比较[例（%）]
组别 例数（n） 并发症
吻合口漏 肠梗阻 切口感染 肺部感染 心力衰竭 深静脉血栓 心脑血管意外
对照组 23 1（4.35） 1（4.35） 2（8.70） 4（17.39） 1（4.35） 2（8.70） 2（8.70）
"无管化"手术组 26 0（0） 0（0） 2（7.69） 1（3.85） 2（7.69） 0（0） 1（3.85）
P值 ? 0.469 0.469 0.692 0.230 1.0 0.215 0.594
表4 两组患者术后48 h生活质量量表（QoR-40）评分的比较
组别 例数（n） 身体舒适度 情绪状态 心理支持 自理能力 疼痛 总评分
对照组 23 45（35~54） 36（27~43） 31（23~34） 12（9~19） 20（13~27） 150（133~165）
"无管化"手术组 26 52（41~59） 40（30~45） 30（26~35） 20（12~22） 27（21~30） 175（158~191）
Z值 ? 3.854 0.953 0.040 5.632 5.538 5.774
P值 ? <0.001 0.340 0.968 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
[1]
Bauer JJ, Gelernt IM, Salky BA, et al. Is routine postoperative nasogastric decompression reallynecessary? [J]. Ann Surg, 1985, 201(2):233-236.
[2]
Cheatham ML, Chapman WC, Key SP, et al. A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy [J]. Ann Surg, 1995, 221(5):469-476.
[3]
Nelson R, Edwards S, Tse B. Prophylactic nasogastric decompression after abdominal surgery [J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2007, 5(3):CD004929.
[4]
Petrowsky H, Demartines N, Rousson V, et al. Evidence based value of prophylactic drainage in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analyses [J]. Ann Surg, 2004, 240(6):1074-1084.
[5]
Karliczek A, Jesus EC, Matos D, et al. Drainage or nondrainage in elective colorectal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Colorectal Dis, 2006, 8(4):259-265.
[6]
Akiyoshi T, Ueno M, Fukunaga Y, et al. Incidence of and risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic anterior resection with intracorporeal rectal transection and double-stapling technique anastomosis for rectal cancer [J]. Am J Surg, 2011, 202(3):259-264.
[7]
Myles PS, Weitkamp B, Jones K, et al. Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-40 [J]. Br J Anaesth, 2000, 84(1):11-15.
[8]
Fowler DL, White SA. Laparoscopy-assisted sigmoid resection [J]. Surg Laparosc Endosc, 1991, 1(3):183-188.
[9]
Tanis PJ, Buskens CJ, Bemelman WA. Laparoscopy for colorectal cancer[J]. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol, 2014, 28(1):29-39.
[10]
Noel JK, Fahrbach K, Estok R, et al. Minimally invasive colorectal resection outcomes: short-term comparison with open procedures [J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2007, 204(2):291-307.
[11]
Ramji KM, Cleghorn MC, Josse JM,et al. Comparison of clinical and economic outcomes between robotic, laparoscopic, and open rectal cancer surgery: early experience at a tertiary care center [J]. Surg Endosc, 2016, 30(4):1337-1343.
[12]
史卫海，任全海，叶年源,等. 65岁以上老年患者腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的短期疗效观察[J].腹腔镜外科杂志, 2016, 21(12):907-910.
[13]
Hewett PJ, Allardyce RA, Bagshaw PF，et al. Short-term outcomes of the Australasian randomized clinical study comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the ALCCaS trial [J]. Ann Surg, 2008, 248(5):728-738.
[14]
Paine JR, Carlson HA,Wangensteen OH. The postoperative controlof distention, nausea, and vomiting. A clinical studywith referenceto the employment of narcotics, cathartics, and nasal cathetersuction-siphonage [J]. JAMA, 1933, 100(24):1910-1917.
[15]
Colvin DB, Lee W, Eisenstat TE, et al. The role of nasointestinal intubation in elective colonic surgery [J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 1986, 29(5):295-299.
[16]
Lei WZ, Zhao GP, Cheng Z, et al. Gastrointestinal decompression after excision and anastomosis of lower digestive tract [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2004, 10(13):1998-2001.
[17]
Wolff BG, Pembeton JH, van Heerden JA, et al. Elective colon and rectal surgery without nasogastric decompression: A prospective, randomized trial [J]. Ann Surg 1989, 209(6):670-673.
[18]
Racette DL, Chang FC, Trekell ME, et al. Is nasogastric intubation necessary in colon operations? [J]. Am J Surg, 1987, 154(6):640-642.
[19]
Zhou T, Wu XT, Zhou YJ, et al. Early removing gastrointestinal decompression and early oral feeding improve patients′ rehabilitation after colorectostomy [J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2006, 12(15):2459-2463.
[20]
Otchy DP,Wolff BG, van Heerden JA,et al. Does the avoidance of nasogastric decompression following elective abdominal colorectal surgery affect the incidence of incisional hernia? Results of a prospective, randomized trial [J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 1995, 38(6):604-608.
[21]
Hoffmann J, Shokouh-Amiri MH, Damm P, et al. A prospective, controlled study of prophylactic drainage aftercolonic anastomoses [J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 1987, 30(6):449-452.
[22]
Urbach DR, Kennedy ED, Cohen MM. Colon and rectalanastomoses do not require routine drainage: a systematicreview and meta-analysis [J]. Ann Surg, 1999, 229(2):174-180.
[23]
Lee SY, Kang SB, Kim DW, et al. Risk faxtors and preventive measures for acute urinary retention after rectal cancer surgery [J]. World J Surg, 2015, 39(1):275-282.
[24]
Nygren J, Thacker J, Carli F, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery society:Guidelines for perioperative care in elective rectal/pelvic surgery: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations [J]. Clin Nutr, 2012, 31(6):801-816.
[25]
Kin C, Rhoads KF, Jalali M, et al. Predictors of postoperative urinary retention after colorectal surgery [J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2013, 56(6):738-746.
[26]
Femandez MA, Karthikeyan S, Wyse M, et al. The incidence of postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty [J]. Ann R Coll Surg Engl, 2014, 96(6):462-465.
[27]
何建华，马曙亮，顾连兵,等.超声引导腹横肌平面阻滞在结直肠癌手术中的应用[J].临床麻醉学杂志, 2010, 26(12):1070-1072.
[28]
Yaghoobi S, Hamidfar M, Lawson DM, et al. Validity and reliability of the Iranian version of the quality of recovery-40 questionnaire [J]. Anesth Pain Med, 2015, 5(2):e20350.
[29]
Herrera FJ, Wong J, Chung F. A systematic review of postoperative recovery outcomes measurements after ambulatory surgery [J]. Anesth Analg, 2007, 105(1):63-69.
[30]
Kluivers KB, Riphagen I, Vierhout ME, et al.Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments [J]. Surgery, 2008, 143(2):206-215.
[1] 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.
[2] 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.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 李博, 贾蓬勃, 李栋, 李小庆. ERCP与LCBDE治疗胆总管结石继发急性重症胆管炎的效果[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 60-63.
[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
1
HTML PDF
最新录用 在线预览 正式出版 最新录用 在线预览 正式出版
0 0 0 0 0 1

  来源 本网站
  次数 1
  比例 100%

摘要
41
最新录用 在线预览 正式出版
0 0 41
  来源 本网站 其他网站
  次数 14 27
  比例 34% 66%

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号