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 ›› 2019, Vol. 08 ›› Issue (06) : 631 -635. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2019.06.016

所属专题: 专题评论 文献

经验交流

经肛全直肠系膜切除术结构化培训后学员学习效果的评价分析
顾磊1, 刘晔1, 蒋春晖1, 俞旻皓1, 秦骏1, 徐庆1,()   
  1. 1. 200127 上海交通大学医学院附属仁济医院胃肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-08 出版日期:2019-12-25
  • 通信作者: 徐庆

Evaluation of the learning effect of students after structured training of transanal total mesorectal excision

Lei Gu1, Ye Liu1, Chunhui Jiang1, Minhao Yu1, Jun Qin1, Qing Xu1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200127, China
  • Received:2019-06-08 Published:2019-12-25
  • Corresponding author: Qing Xu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Xu Qing, Email:
引用本文:

顾磊, 刘晔, 蒋春晖, 俞旻皓, 秦骏, 徐庆. 经肛全直肠系膜切除术结构化培训后学员学习效果的评价分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2019, 08(06): 631-635.

Lei Gu, Ye Liu, Chunhui Jiang, Minhao Yu, Jun Qin, Qing Xu. Evaluation of the learning effect of students after structured training of transanal total mesorectal excision[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2019, 08(06): 631-635.

目的

通过分析接受经肛全直肠系膜切除术(taTME)结构化培训后学员所开展的临床工作,探讨结构化培训的效果及意义。

方法

采用回顾性研究分析,统计分析自培训后开展的20例taTME手术的相关手术指标,术后并发症情况以及主观熟练度评价。

结果

将20例患者根据时间先后进行分组比较,分为前10例(A组)和后10例(B组)。在手术出血量、是否行预防性造口、吻合口漏的发生上差异无统计学意义;在手术时间上,总手术时间两组比较差异无统计学意义,会阴部手术时间(t=2.557,P=0.05)和经肛平台摆放时间(t=4.575,P<0.01)上B组患者明显少于A组。吻合方式上后期B组手工吻合的患者要远多于前期A组的患者;手术者对于两组患者前列腺或阴道后壁辨认情况、荷包缝合情况的评价指标差异无统计学意义,但在对吻合口质量的评价上差异有统计学意义(t=8.667,P<0.05)。

结论

在开展taTME手术前,通过结构化培训这种合理的教学方式,可使临床医生深入掌握盆底肛周的解剖结构,缩短学习曲线,提高手术安全性及保护患者的权益。

Objective

To explore the effect and significance of structured training through the clinical work carried out by the trainees after undergoing structured training of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME).

Methods

Statistical analysis of 20 surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and subjective proficiency evaluation of taTME surgery performed after training through retrospective analysis.

Results

Twenty patients were divided into the first 10 cases (group A) and the latter 10 cases (group B) for grouping comparison. There was no statistical difference in the occurrence of surgical bleeding, preventive ostomy and anastomotic leakage, and there was no difference in the total operation time between the two groups, the time of perineal operation (t=2.557, P=0.05) and the time of the anus platform (t=4.575, P<0.01) were significantly lower than that of group A. There were more patients with manual anastomosis in group B than those in group A. There was no statistical difference in the evaluation indexes of prostate or vaginal posterior wall identification and suture of the two groups of patients. There were statistical differences in the evaluation of the quality of the anastomosis (t=8.667, P<0.05).

Conclusion

Before carrying out a taTME operation, through structured training, this reasonable teaching method can enable clinicians to deeply grasp the anatomical structure of pelvic perianal, shorten the learning curve, improve the safety of operation and protect the rights and interests of patients.

表1 患者病例资料
表2 手术情况
表3 两组术中情况比较
表4 两组患者术后病理
表5 两组术者主观评价情况
[1]
姚宏伟,陈建志,张宏宇,等. 中国经肛全直肠系膜切除手术病例登记协作研究数据库2018年度报告:一项全国性登记研究[J]. 中国实用外科杂志,2019,39(1):24-30.
[2]
中华医学会外科学分会结直肠外科学组,中华医学会外科学分会腹腔镜与内镜外科学组.直肠癌经肛全直肠系膜切除专家共识及手术操作指南(2017版) [J].中国实用外科杂志, 2017, 37(9): 978-984.
[3]
Key Statistics for Colorectal Cancer[EB/OL].

URL    
[4]
Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery-the clue to pelvic recurrence? [J] Br J Surg, 1982, 69(10): 613-616.
[5]
Melamed A, Margul DJ. Chen L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer [J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1905-1914.
[6]
Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, et al. Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer [J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(20): 1895-1904.
[7]
Deijen CL, Vasmel JE, de Lange-de Klerk ESM, et al. Ten-year outcomes of a randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colon cancer [J]. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31(6): 2607-2615.
[8]
Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Haglind E, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer [J]. N Engl J Med, 2015, 372(14): 1324-1332.
[9]
Fleshman J, Branda ME, Sargent DJ, et al. Disease-free survival and local recurrence for laparoscopic resection compared with open resection of stage II to III rectal cancer: follow-up results of the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized controlled trial [J]. Ann Surg, 2019, 269(4): 589-595.
[10]
Sylla P, Rattner DW, Delgado S, et al. NOTES transanal rectal cancer resection using transanal endoscopic microsurgery and laparoscopic assistance [J]. Surg Endosc, 2010, 24(5): 1205-1210.
[11]
Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward [J]. Surg Endosc, 2010, 24(9): 2200-2205.
[12]
Deijen CL, Velthuis S, Tsai A, et al. COLOR III: a multicentre randomised clinical trial comparing transanal TME versus laparoscopic TME for mid and low rectal cancer [J]. Surg Endosc, 2016, 30(8): 3210-3215.
[13]
Penna M, Hompes R, Mackenzie H, et al. First international training and assessment consensus workshop on transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) [J]. Tech Coloproctol, 2016, 20(6): 343-352.
[1] 王振宁, 杨康, 王得晨, 邹敏, 归明彬, 王雅楠, 徐明. 机器人与腹腔镜手术联合经自然腔道取标本对中低位直肠癌患者远期疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 437-442.
[2] 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.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 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.
[13] 江东根, 依力夏提·艾力, 依布拉音江·阿布力克木, 依力盼·依拉木, 冯瑶, 艾尼玩·木拉克, 艾克拜尔江·阿里木. 基层医院单一术者改良单通道腹腔镜下鞘状突环扎术学习曲线及体会[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 560-565.
[14] 韩加刚, 王振军. 梗阻性左半结肠癌的治疗策略[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 450-458.
[15] 梁轩豪, 李小荣, 李亮, 林昌伟. 肠梗阻支架置入术联合新辅助化疗治疗结直肠癌急性肠梗阻的疗效及其预后的Meta 分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 472-482.
阅读次数
全文


摘要