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 ›› 2022, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (03) : 254 -260. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2022.03.011

经验交流

经肛微创手术(TAMIS)与经肛内镜显微手术(TEM)在直肠肿瘤局部切除中的应用优劣分析
郑恢超1, 王李1, 童卫东1,(), 黄彬1, 田跃1, 赵松1, 高羽1, 李凡1, 刘宝华1   
  1. 1. 400042 重庆,陆军军医大学大坪医院胃结直肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2021-10-11 出版日期:2022-06-25
  • 通信作者: 童卫东
  • 基金资助:
    国家临床重点专科军队建设项目(4246ZA5); 陆军军医大学创新人才项目(2019CXLCB004)

Analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of transanal minimally invasive surgery and transanal endoscopic microsurgery in local resection of rectal tumors

Huichao Zheng1, Li Wang1, Weidong Tong1,(), Bin Huang1, Yue Tian1, Song Zhao1, Yu Gao1, Fan Li1, Baohua Liu1   

  1. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Army Medical Center (Daping Hospital), Chongqing 400042, China
  • Received:2021-10-11 Published:2022-06-25
  • Corresponding author: Weidong Tong
引用本文:

郑恢超, 王李, 童卫东, 黄彬, 田跃, 赵松, 高羽, 李凡, 刘宝华. 经肛微创手术(TAMIS)与经肛内镜显微手术(TEM)在直肠肿瘤局部切除中的应用优劣分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 254-260.

Huichao Zheng, Li Wang, Weidong Tong, Bin Huang, Yue Tian, Song Zhao, Yu Gao, Fan Li, Baohua Liu. Analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of transanal minimally invasive surgery and transanal endoscopic microsurgery in local resection of rectal tumors[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2022, 11(03): 254-260.

目的

比较经肛微创手术(TAMIS)与经肛内镜显微手术(TEM)行直肠肿瘤局部切除的近远期疗效。

方法

采用回顾性队列研究的方法。收集2012年4月至2021年6月陆军军医大学大坪医院收治的52例直肠肿瘤患者的临床资料。其中26例行TEM手术的患者设为TEM组,26例行TAMIS手术的患者设为TAMIS组。比较两组的一般资料、围手术期指标、并发症情况及无病生存期等数据。

结果

两组患者性别、年龄、美国麻醉医师协会分级、肿瘤距肛缘距离、肿瘤直径、肿瘤病理类型的比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。所有患者均顺利完成手术,无术中并发症。TEM组手术时间及出血量分别为(80.9±39.0)min,(22.0±23.7)mL;TAMIS组手术时间及出血量分别为(90.0±27.0)min,(24.8±20.7)mL,两组患者上述指标比较,差异无统计学意义(t=-0.960,-0.449;P>0.05)。TEM组无术后并发症发生,TAMIS组有1例患者术后出现盆腔感染,经抗感染治疗后出院。两组患者术后首次肛门排气时间、术后首次进清流质饮食时间、术后住院时间比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.610,-1.091,-1.675;P>0.05)。所有患者的术后病理结果提示手术切缘、基底部均未见肿瘤细胞残留。TEM组有1例直肠腺瘤患者在术后1年出现局部复发,予以肠镜下切除后未再复发。TAMIS组有1例早期直肠癌患者在术后8个月出现肝、肺转移。TEM组与TAMIS组3年无病生存率分别为95.5%和93.8%,两组比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.108,P=0.742)。

结论

TAMIS手术行直肠肿瘤局部切除安全可行,可取得与TEM手术相似的近远期临床疗效。

Objective

To compare the short-term and long-term efficacy of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) in local resection of rectal tumors.

Methods

The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinical data of 52 patients with rectal tumors who were admitted to Daping Hospital of Army Military Medical University from April 2012 to June 2021 were collected. Twenty-six patients undergoing TEM surgery were allocated to the TEM group, and 26 patients undergoing TAMIS were allocated to the TAMIS group. General data, perioperative indicators, complications and disease-free survival were compared between the two groups.

Results

There were no significant differences in gender, age, American society of anesthesiologists classification, tumor distance from anal margin, tumor diameter and pathological type between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients successfully completed the operation without intraoperative complications. The operative time and blood loss in TEM group were (80.9±39.0) min and (22.0±23.7) mL, respectively. The operation time and blood loss in TAMIS group were (90.0±27.0) min and (24.8±20.7) mL, respectively. There was no significant difference in the above indexes between the two groups (t=-0.960, -0.449; P>0.05). No postoperative complications occurred in the TEM group. In the TAMIS group, one patient developed pelvic infection after operation, and was discharged successfully after anti-infection treatment. There were no significant differences in the time to first flatus, time of first clear-fluid diet and the length of postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (t=0.610,-1.091,-1.675;P>0.05). Pathological examination confirmed that the surgical margin and basal margin of all patients were negative. In the TEM group, one patient with rectal adenoma had local recurrence 1 year after surgery. In the TAMIS group, one patient with early rectal cancer developed liver and lung metastasis 8 months after surgery. The 3-year disease-free survival rates of the TEM group and the TAMIS group were 95.5% and 93.8%, respectively, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (χ2=0.108, P=0.742).

Conclusion

TAMIS is safe and feasible for local resection of rectal tumor, and has similar short-term and long-term oncological outcome as TEM.

表1 两组患者一般资料比较[
xˉ
±s,例(%)]
图1 安装经肛微创手术装置
图2 手术平台安置后
图3 肿瘤边缘0.5 cm~1 cm处标记切缘
图4 缝合后术野
图5 TEM手术平台
表2 两组患者围手术期相关指标比较[
xˉ
±s,例(%)]
图6 TEM组与TAMIS组术后无病生存曲线
[1]
Young DO, Kumar AS. Local excision of rectal cancer[J]. Surg Clin North Am, 2017, 97(3): 573-585.
[2]
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[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2013, 56(3): 301-307.
[3]
中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2020年版)专家组. 国家卫生健康委员会中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2020年版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2020, 23(6): 521-540.
[4]
Buess G, Theiss R, Hutterer F, et al. Transanal endoscopic surgery of the rectum-testing a new method in animal experiments[Z]. Leber Magen Darm, 1983, 13: 73-77.
[5]
Gilshtein H, Duek SD, Khoury W. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: current and future perspectives[J]. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2016, 26(3): e46-e49.
[6]
Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward[J]. Surg Endosc, 2010, 24(9): 2200-2205.
[7]
Lim SB, Seo SI, Lee JL, et al. Feasibility of transanal minimally invasive surgery for mid-rectal lesions[J]. Surg Endosc, 2012, 26(11): 3127-3132.
[8]
Lee L, Edwards K, Hunter IA, et al. Quality of local excision for rectal neoplasms using transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus transanal minimally invasive surgery: a multi-institutional matched analysis[Z]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2017, 60: 928-935.
[9]
Van den Eynde F, Jaekers J, Fieuws S, et al. TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM for resection of intraluminal rectal tumors[Z]. Tech Coloproctol, 2019, 23: 161-166.
[10]
UW, TW, HS, et al. ASA classification and perioperative variables as predictors of postoperative outcome[Z]. 1996, 77: 217-222.
[11]
Melin AA, Kalaskar S, Taylor L, et al. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery: is one technique superior?[J]. Am J Surg, 2016, 212(6): 1063-1067.
[12]
Rimonda R, Arezzo A, Arolfo S, et al. Trans anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) with SILS™ port versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM): a comparative experimental study[Z]. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27: 3762-3768.
[13]
Bahadoer RR, Dijkstra EA, van Etten B, et al. Short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy before total mesorectal excision (TME) versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME, and optional adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (RAPIDO): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2021, 22(1): 29-42.
[14]
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/CD]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2016, 5(1): 33-39.
[15]
Liu S, Suzuki T, Murray BW, et al. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) with the newest robotic surgical platform: a multi-institutional North American experience[J]. Surg Endosc, 2019, 33(2): 543-548.
[16]
周俊峰, 何庆良, 王家兴, 等. 手套法经肛微创手术与经肛内镜微创手术治疗直肠肿瘤的临床疗效[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2020, 19(3): 302-307.
[17]
Stipa F, Tierno SM, Russo G, et al. Trans-anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) versus trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM): a comparative case-control matched-pairs analysis[J]. Surg Endosc, 2021, 36: 2081-2086.
[18]
Lee L, Burke JP, deBeche-Adams T, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for local excision of benign and malignant rectal neoplasia: outcomes from 200 consecutive cases with midterm follow up[J]. Ann Surg, 2018, 267(5): 910-916.
[19]
Witjes CDM, Patel AS, Shenoy A, et al. Oncological outcome after local treatment for early stage rectal cancer[J]. Surg Endosc, 2021, 36: 489497.
[20]
Xiong X, Wang C, Wang B, et al. Can transanal endoscopic microsurgery effectively treat T1 or T2 rectal cancer?A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Surg Oncol, 2021, 37: 101561.
[21]
Wang H, Ye T, Chen J, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for rectal tumor: a case report and literature review[Z]. 2020: 8, 1101.
[22]
Shen JM, Zhao JY, Ye T, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery vs endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal benign tumors and rectal carcinoids: A retrospective analysis[J]. World J Clin Cases, 2020, 8(19): 4311-4319.
[23]
Bislenghi G, Wolthuis AM, de Buck van Overstraeten A, et al. AirSeal system insufflator to maintain a stable pneumorectum during TAMIS[J]. Tech Coloproctol, 2015, 19(1): 43-45.
[24]
Baker EJ, Waters PS, Peacock O, et al. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery-technical, oncological and patient outcomes from a single institution[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2020, 22(10): 1422-1428.
[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