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) ›› 2019, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (01) : 102 -104. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2019.01.032

所属专题: 文献

论著

3D与2D腹腔镜根治术治疗右半结肠癌的疗效对比
刘汉东1,()   
  1. 1. 610400 四川成都金堂县第一人民医院胃肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2018-01-23 出版日期:2019-02-26
  • 通信作者: 刘汉东

Comparison of therapeutic effect of 3D and 2D laparoscopy-assisted radical operation in treatment of right colon cancer

Handong Liu1,()   

  1. 1. Gastroenterological Surgery, First People’s Hospital of Jintang County, Sichuan Chengdu 610400
  • Received:2018-01-23 Published:2019-02-26
  • Corresponding author: Handong Liu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Liu Handong, Email:
引用本文:

刘汉东. 3D与2D腹腔镜根治术治疗右半结肠癌的疗效对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(01): 102-104.

Handong Liu. Comparison of therapeutic effect of 3D and 2D laparoscopy-assisted radical operation in treatment of right colon cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(01): 102-104.

目的

探讨3D腹腔镜根治术治疗右半结肠癌的临床疗效及安全性。

方法

回顾性分析2014年1月至2016年1月接受治疗的53例右半结肠癌患者的临床资料,根据手术方式分为3D组28例和2D组25例,采用SPSS22.0软件对所有数据进行统计学分析,围手术期相关指标等计量资料以(±s)表示,采用独立t检验;手术切面分级及术后并发症发生率等组间比较采用χ2检验,均以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

3D组患者手术切面分级明显优于2D组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05); 3D组手术时间、术中出血量明显优于2D组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者淋巴结清扫数目、术后首次排气时间、下床活动时间、平均住院时间、平均住院费用,术后并发症发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

3D腹腔镜根治术治疗右半结肠癌的是安全可行的,具有手术时间短、术中出血量少的优势,值得在临床进一步推广应用。

Objective

To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of 3D laparoscopy-assisted radical operation in the treatment of right colon cancer.

Methods

From January 2014 to January 2016, a retrospective analysis was performed in 53 patients with right colorectal cancer treated in our hospital, including 28 cases in 3D group and 25 cases in 2D group. Statistical analysis were performed by using SPSS 22.0 software, the perioperative indicators were expressed as mean±standard deviation(±s), and were examined by using t test. The surgical cutting surface classification and post-operative complication rate were examined by chi square test. A P<0.05 was considered as significant difference.

Results

The surgical cutting surface classification in the 3D group was better than that in the 2D group, there was statistically significant differences between the two groups (P<0.05); The operation time, intraoperative blood loss in the 3D group were significantly lower than those in the 2D group, there were statistically significant differences between the two groups (P<0.05); There were no difference between two groups in the number of removed lymph nodes, first flatus time, ground activity time, average hospitalization time, hospitalization cost and postoperative complication rate (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The 3D laparoscopy-assisted radical operation in treatment of right colon cancer is feasible and safe with the advantage of shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss and better surgical cutting surface classification, which is valuable to be applied in clinic.

表1 53例右半结肠癌不同手术方法两组患者基本资料比较[(±s),例]
表2 53例右半结肠癌不同手术方法两组患者围手术期情况比较(±s)
表3 53例右半结肠癌不同手术方法两组患者术后并发症发生率比较(例)
[1]
Aran V, Victorino AP, Thuler LC, et al. Colorectal Cancer: Epidemiology, disease mechanisms and interventions to reduce onset and mortality[J]. Clin Colorectal Cancer, 2016,15(3):195-203.
[2]
池畔,官国先.不断提高腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术规范化水平[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2017,11(2):91-94.
[3]
苏向前,张成海.腹腔镜右半结肠癌CME根治术与策略[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2017,11(2):95-98.
[4]
许庆文,徐飞鹏,王妃凤,等. 腹腔镜辅助与开腹结直肠癌根治术临床对比研究[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志:电子版,2016,10(2):112-115.
[5]
West NP, Morris EJ, Rotimi O, et al. Pathology grading of colon cancer surgical resection and its association with survival: a retrospective observational study[J]. Lancet Oncol,2008, 9(9):857-865.
[6]
孔志远,李凯,孔祥忠,等. 腹腔镜下完整结肠系膜切除在右半结肠癌根治术中的应用37例分析[J].中华肿瘤防治杂志,2015,22(22):187-188.
[7]
杨世斌,韩方海,肖隆斌,等. 腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌根治术与开放手术的临床应用比较[J]. 实用医学杂志,2016,32(11):1819-1822.
[8]
于威,刘铜军,李春生,等. 3D与2D腹腔镜直肠癌根治术的对比研究[J].中华普通外科杂志,2015,30(4):297-299.
[9]
马君俊,洪希周,何子锐,等. 3D与2D腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术中术者主观感受的随机对照研究[J].中华消化外科杂志,2016, 15(9):892-896.
[10]
白军伟,张超,薛焕洲. 3D与2D腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术的疗效分析[J].中华消化外科杂志,2016,15(9):897-901.
[11]
何子锐,臧潞,马君俊,等. 3D腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术的应用现状与展望[J].中华消化外科杂志,2017,16(8):804-807.
[12]
Cologne KG, Zehetner J, Liwanag L, et al. Three-dimensional Laparoscopy: Does Improved Visualization Decrease the Learning Curve Among Trainees in Advanced Procedures?[J]. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech,2015,25(4):321-323.
[13]
叶凯,陈琦玮,许建华,等. 腹腔镜右半结肠切除术血管解剖及处理[J].中华胃肠外科杂志,2017,20(8):953-954.
[14]
陶国全,钱燕,于仁,等. 3D腹腔镜在右半结肠癌根治术中的应用[J].中国微创外科杂志,2017, 17(7):609-611,626.
[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] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 韩戟, 杨力, 陈玉. 腹部形态CT参数与完全腹腔镜全胃切除术术中失血量的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 88-91.
[12] 王露, 周丽君. 全腹腔镜下远端胃大部切除不同吻合方式对胃癌患者胃功能恢复、并发症发生率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.
[13] 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.
[14] 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.
[15] 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.
阅读次数
全文


摘要