切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版) ›› 2018, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (01) : 68 -70. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2018.01.021

所属专题: 文献

论著

腹腔镜下完整肠系膜切除术与传统结肠癌根治术治疗中青年及老年Ⅲ期结肠癌的效果比较
陈柏羽1,()   
  1. 1. 223400 江苏省淮安市涟水县人民医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2017-05-25 出版日期:2018-02-26
  • 通信作者: 陈柏羽

Comparison of the effect of laparoscopic complete mesocolic resection and traditional radical colectomy in the treatment of young and middle-aged and elderly aged patients with stage Ⅲ colon cancer

Boyu Cheng1,()   

  1. 1. Department of general surgery, Lianshui People’s Hospital, Lianshui 223400, China
  • Received:2017-05-25 Published:2018-02-26
  • Corresponding author: Boyu Cheng
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Chen Boyu, Email:
引用本文:

陈柏羽. 腹腔镜下完整肠系膜切除术与传统结肠癌根治术治疗中青年及老年Ⅲ期结肠癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(01): 68-70.

Boyu Cheng. Comparison of the effect of laparoscopic complete mesocolic resection and traditional radical colectomy in the treatment of young and middle-aged and elderly aged patients with stage Ⅲ colon cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2018, 12(01): 68-70.

目的

探讨腹腔镜下完整肠系膜切除术与传统结肠癌根治术治疗中青年及老年Ⅲ期结肠癌的效果比较。

方法

选取2013年1月至2016年6月治疗的Ⅲ期结肠癌患者153例进行回顾性分析,根据手术术式的不同分为完整肠系膜切除术(CME)组(78例,中青年34例、老年44例)和传统组(75例,中青年37例、老年38例),CME组采用腹腔镜下完整肠系膜切除术,传统组采用传统结肠癌根治术。应用SPSS 17.0统计学软件进行统计学处理,术中、术后相关指标和淋巴结清扫情况以(±s)表示,采用独立t检验;术后并发症的发生率采用卡方检验,以P<0.05差异具有统计学意义。

结果

两组患者中不同年龄段(中青年和老年)患者的术中、术后相关指标、淋巴结清扫情况和术后并发症进行组内比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);与传统组相比,CME组中青年和老年患者的术中出血量显著降低(P<0.05),手术时间、术后排气时间、留置引流管时间和住院时间均显著缩短(P<0.05);与传统组相比,CEM组中青年和老年患者的淋巴结清扫数、左、右结肠淋巴结和淋巴结阳性转移数均显著增加(P<0.05);传统组的术后并发症的总发生率为8例(10.7%),CME组为2例(2.6%),差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

腹腔镜下完整肠系膜切除术治疗中青年和老年Ⅲ期结肠癌的临床效果较好,术中出血量少、术后恢复快,且安全性较高。

Objective

To compare the effect between laparoscopic complete mesocolic resection and traditional radical colectomy in the treatment of young and middle-aged and elderly aged patients with stage Ⅲ colon cancer.

Methods

153 patients with stage Ⅲ colon cancer were collected in our hospital from January 2013 to June 2016 and analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into the CME group (78 cases, with 34 cases of young and middle-aged patients, and 44 cases of elderly patients, who received laparoscopic complete mesocolic resection) and the traditional group (75 cases, with 37 cases of young and middle-aged patients, and 38 cases of elderly patients, who received traditional radical colectomy) according to the operation method. Statistical analysis was performed by using SPSS 17.0 software, intraoperative and postoperative indicators and conditions of lymph node dissected were presented as (±s) and examined by using t test; the incidence of postoperative complications were presented as [n (%)] and examined by chi square test. A P value of <0.05 was considered as significant difference.

Results

There was no significant difference of intraoperative and postoperative related indicates, lymph node dissection and postoperative complications among the different aged patients (young and middle-aged and elderly patients) in both of the two groups (P>0.05); Compared with the traditional group, the operative blood loss of young and middle-aged and elderly patients in CME group was significantly reduced, and the operative time, postoperative exhaust time, drainage time and hospitalization time were significantly shortened (P<0.05). Compared with the traditional group, the number of lymph node dissected, lymph node in left and right colon, number of positive lymph node metastases of young and middle-aged and elderly patients in CME group were increased significantly (P<0.05). The total incidence of postoperative complications in the traditional group was 8 (10.7%), and in the CME group was 2 (2.6%), and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic resection is effective in the treatment of young and middle-aged and elderly patients with stage Ⅲ colon cancer, with less blood loss, faster postoperative recovery and higher safety.

表1 153例Ⅲ期结肠癌患者不同术式两组患者的一般临床资料比较(例)
表2 153例Ⅲ期结肠癌患者不同术式两组患者术中、术后相关指标的比较(±s)
表3 153例Ⅲ期结肠癌患者不同术式两组患者术中淋巴结清扫情况的比较(±s)
表4 153例Ⅲ期结肠癌患者不同术式两组患者术后并发症的比较[例(%)]
[1]
刘书强,赵象文,梁志宏,等. 腹腔镜完整结肠系膜切除术与传统结肠癌根治术的淋巴结清扫和短期疗效比较[J]. 中国内镜杂志,2015, 21(8):794-797.
[2]
马胜辉,李建华,王翔,等. 完整结肠系膜切除术与传统根治术治疗结肠癌的疗效比较[J]. 中国肿瘤临床与康复,2015, 22(5):552-554.
[3]
杨言殷. 完整结肠系膜切除术应用于结肠癌治疗中的有效性及安全性分析[J]. 临床医学工程,2017, 24(1):103-104.
[4]
邓鹏,梁延华,丰文学. 完整结肠系膜切除手术对结肠癌患者的临床疗效研究[J]. 癌症进展,2016, 14(3):248-250.
[5]
周健,辜国军,肖斌,等. 完整结肠系膜切除术治疗结肠癌临床效果分析[J/CD]. 中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2015, 7(10):28-30.
[6]
Galza G, Leto E, De VF, et al. Is complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation safe and effective in the surgical treatment of right-sided colon cancers? A prospective study[J]. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2014, 29(1):89-97.
[7]
范振宇. 传统根治术与全结肠系膜切除术治疗结肠癌的临床效果对比[J]. 中国医药指南,2017, 15(4):146-147.
[8]
王宏波,谢桂珍,关大勇. 对比分析完整结肠系膜切除术与传统根治术治疗结肠癌的临床效果[J]. 中国现代药物应用,2014, 8(12):63-63.
[9]
刘军辉,张学军,赵永灵. 腹腔镜结肠癌手术对患者免疫功能和应激反应影响分析[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(2):123-126.
[10]
张忠涛,杨盈赤. 结肠癌完整结肠系膜切除术的技术要点[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2012, 6(2):126-131.
[11]
郑桁,张伟,王康. 完整肠系膜切除术治疗Ⅲ期结肠癌的效果及安全性分析[J]. 中国普通外科杂志,2016, 25(4):487-491.
[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] 李怡泉, 谢宇斌, 胡宏, 张燕茹, 陈图锋. 基于生物信息学分析HDAC8在结肠癌中的临床意义及其与免疫浸润的关系[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 275-281.
[3] 崔宏帅, 冯丽明, 东维玲, 韩博. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术+IGLN清扫术治疗局部进展期结肠肝曲癌的临床效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 566-569.
[4] 丁志翔, 于鹏, 段绍斌. 血浆BRAF基因检测对腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术中行幽门淋巴结清扫的指导价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 570-573.
[5] 王维花, 王楠, 乔庆, 罗红. 完全腹腔镜右半结肠癌切除术两种腔内消化道重建方案对比研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 574-577.
[6] 李晓鸥, 杨鹤鸣, 王国栋, 林海冠, 杨建武. 不同入路腹腔镜左半结肠癌根治术治疗效果对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 377-380.
[7] 孙龙凤, 侯高峰, 王幼黎, 刘磊. 腹腔镜下右半结肠癌D3根治术中SMA或SMV入路的选择[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 438-441.
[8] 何慧玲, 鲁祖斌, 冯嘉莉, 梁声强. 术前外周血NLR和PLR对结肠癌术后肝转移的影响[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 682-687.
[9] 关国欣, 罗福文. 结肠癌合并急性梗阻的个性化处理[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 459-463.
[10] 石阳, 于剑锋, 曹可, 翟志伟, 叶春祥, 王振军, 韩加刚. 可扩张金属支架置入联合新辅助化疗治疗完全梗阻性左半结肠癌围手术期并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 464-471.
[11] 任佳琪, 刁德昌, 何自衍, 张雪阳, 唐新, 李文娟, 李洪明, 卢新泉, 易小江. 网膜融合线导向的脾曲游离技术在左半结肠癌根治术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 362-367.
[12] 曹猛, 郭杰东, 朱灿, 许腾, 樊瑞智, 江涛, 宋军, 徐溢新. 完全腹腔镜右半结肠切除术中顺蠕动侧侧吻合的有效性及安全性评价[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(04): 315-319.
[13] 靳英, 付小霞, 陈美茹, 袁璐, 郝力瑶. CD147调控MAPK信号通路对结肠癌细胞增殖和凋亡的影响及机制研究[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 474-480.
[14] 胡小靖, 张华. 妊娠期卵巢囊肿蒂扭转的诊断与治疗[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 197-201.
[15] 傅新露, 李之岳, 卢丹. 妊娠合并结肠癌穿孔致脓毒症休克一例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 227-231.
阅读次数
全文


摘要