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) ›› 2020, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (01) : 81 -85. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2020.01.024

所属专题: 文献

论著

手助腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术在进展期胃癌中的临床效果对比研究
赵云1, 邓仲鸣1,()   
  1. 1. 441000 湖北医药学院附属襄阳市第一人民医院
  • 收稿日期:2019-03-13 出版日期:2020-02-26
  • 通信作者: 邓仲鸣

Comparative study on the clinical effect of hand-assisted laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

yun Zhao1, zhongming Deng1,()   

  1. 1. Xiangyang first people’s hospital affiliated to hubei university of medicine 441000
  • Received:2019-03-13 Published:2020-02-26
  • Corresponding author: zhongming Deng
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Deng Zhongming, Email:
引用本文:

赵云, 邓仲鸣. 手助腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术在进展期胃癌中的临床效果对比研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(01): 81-85.

yun Zhao, zhongming Deng. Comparative study on the clinical effect of hand-assisted laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2020, 14(01): 81-85.

目的

对比手助腹腔镜及腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术在进展期胃癌中临床疗效及价值。

方法

回顾性分析2014年1月至2016年12月67例接受远端胃癌根治术的进展期胃癌患者资料。其中手助组34例,行手助腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术;腔镜组33例,行腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术。采用统计学软件SPSS 18.0进行数据分析,围手术期指标、炎性反应、生活质量评分等以(±s)表示,行独立t检验;临床分期、分化程度等行χ2检验;采用KaplanMeier法绘制两组2年无病生存率(DFS)及总生存率(OS)曲线图,用Logrank检验进行远期生存分析,P<0.05表示差异有统计学意义。

结果

手助组比腔镜组手术时间短、术中出血量少(P<0.05)。术后3 d两组WBC计数及血清CRP、IL-6、TNF-a水平较术前显著升高,腔镜组升高幅度大于手助组(P<0.05)。术后1个月两组各项生活质量评分均降低,但手助组高于腔镜组(P<0.05)。术后6个月血红蛋白(Hb)水平手助组高于腔镜组(P<0.05),血清总蛋白(Tp)水平手助组低于腔镜组(P<0.05);术后12个月两组Hb、Tp、血清白蛋白含量(Alb)、营养指数(PNI)组间差异更加明显,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者2年DFS和OS差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

手助腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术用时短、出血量少、术后恢复快,患者术后生活质量及预后营养水平更高,整体疗效优于腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术。

Objective

To compare the clinical efficacy and value of hand assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy assisted radical gastrectomy for distal advanced gastric cancer.

Methods

Data of 67 patients with advanced gastric cancer who underwent distal radical gastrectomy from January 2014 to December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. 34 patients in the hand-assisted group received hand-assisted laparoscopic radical resection of distal gastric cancer. Laparoscopy assisted radical gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer was performed in 33 patients. Statistical software SPSS 18.0 was used for data analysis. Perioperative indicators, inflammatory response, and quality of life score were expressed as (±s), and independent t test was performed. χ2 test was performed for clinical staging and degree of differentiation. Kaplan-meier method was used to draw 2-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and overall survival rate (OS) curves of the two groups, and log-rank test was used for long-term survival analysis. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The hand group had shorter operation time and less intraoperative blood loss than the laparoscopy group (P<0.05). WBC count and serum CRP, il-6 and tnf-a levels were significantly increased in the two groups 3 days after surgery compared with those before surgery, and the increase in the laparoscopy group was greater than those in the hand-assisted group (P<0.05). All the scores of quality of life in the two groups were decreased 1 month after surgery, but the hand-assisted group was higher than the laparoscopy group (P<0.05). Six months after the operation, the Hb level of the hand AIDS group was higher than that of the endoscopy group (P<0.05), and the Tp level of the hand AIDS group was lower than that of the endoscopy group (P<0.05). The differences of Hb, Tp, Alb and PNI between the two groups were more obvious 12 months after surgery (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in 2-year DFS and OS between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Hand-assisted laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer is shorter in time, less in blood loss, faster in postoperative recovery, higher in postoperative quality of life and prognostic nutrition of patients, and the overall efficacy is better than laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer.

表1 67例远端胃癌根治术患者不同术式两组患者一般资料比较[(±s),例]
表2 67例远端胃癌根治术患者不同术式两组围手术期指标比较(±s)
表3 67例远端胃癌根治术患者不同术式两组术前、术后3 d应激反应情况对比(±s)
表4 67例远端胃癌根治术患者不同术式两组术前、术后1个月生活质量评估情况对比(±s)
图1 67例远端胃癌根治术患者不同术式两组术后12个月营养水平变化
图2 67例远端胃癌根治术的胃癌患者不同术式两组术后2年DFS曲线图
图3 67例远端胃癌根治术患者不同术式两组术后2年OS曲线图
[1]
Liu Y, Sethi NS, Hinoue T,et al.Comparative Molecular Analysis of Gastrointestinal Adenocarcinomas[J].Cancer Cell,2018,33(4):721-735.
[2]
Wang TT, Zhao YL, Peng LS, et al.Tumour-activated neutrophils in gastric cancer foster immune suppression and disease progression through GM-CSF-PD-L1 pathway[J].Gut,2017,66(11):1900-1911.
[3]
倪立新,朱泓宇,周健,等.完全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术的近期临床疗效对比研究[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2018,24(1):25-29.
[4]
吴刚,闫文锋,张建成,等.腹腔镜辅助与手助腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术的比较[J].中国微创外科杂志,2015,15(8):711-713.
[5]
徐伟,翟博.腹腔镜胃癌根治术47例[J].中国现代普通外科进展,2010,13(6):487-489.
[6]
欧阳灿晖,李君玉,朱海燕,等.NBI放大内镜联合EUS在早期胃癌中诊断的应用[J].当代医学,2018,24(31):167-169.
[7]
高增战,李树营.胃癌D2根治术采用腹腔镜与传统开腹术治疗进展期胃癌的疗效对比[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2018,12(6):520-522.
[8]
穆同生,安翎,马林.腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术联合D2淋巴结清扫治疗中上部进展期胃癌的疗效观察[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2018,12(6):517-519.
[9]
刘伟,王占文,仲丽静,等.手助腹腔镜在胃贲门癌根治术中的手术配合[J].河北医药,2018,40(22):3501-3504.
[10]
曹永宽.手辅助腹腔镜胃癌根治术的挑战与进展[J/CD].中华普通外科学文献(电子版),2016,10(5):334-339.
[11]
崔海滨,白希永,葛怀娥,等.No.5、No.6淋巴结清扫在进展期近端胃癌中的临床价值[J].现代肿瘤医学,2018,9(7):1166-1169.
[12]
高王军,王治伟,李福广.腹腔镜胃癌根治术对胃癌患者疗效及免疫功能影响的研究[J].癌症进展,2018,16(15):1882-1884,1906.
[13]
Li HZ, Chen JX, Zheng Y,et al.Laparoscopic-assisted versus open radical gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlledtrials[J].J Surg Oncol,2016,113(7):756-767.
[14]
Zhang Z, Sun S, Qi J,et al.Three United Laparoscopic Surgery for the Treatment of Gastric Cardia Cancer-A Comparative Study with Laparotomy and Laparoscopy-Assisted Surgery[J].J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A,2017,27(2):115-120.
[15]
Miao Z.Comparison between laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy for the treatment of acute ruptured ectopic pregnancy[J].J Acut Dis,2017,6(3):97-100.
[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] 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.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 刘世君, 马杰, 师鲁静. 胃癌完整系膜切除术+标准D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 27-30.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 陈浩, 王萌. 胃印戒细胞癌的临床病理特征及治疗选择的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 108-111.
[10] 贺斌, 马晋峰. 胃癌脾门淋巴结转移危险因素[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 694-699.
[11] 梁孟杰, 朱欢欢, 王行舟, 江航, 艾世超, 孙锋, 宋鹏, 王萌, 刘颂, 夏雪峰, 杜峻峰, 傅双, 陆晓峰, 沈晓菲, 管文贤. 联合免疫治疗的胃癌转化治疗患者预后及术后并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 619-623.
[12] 孟令凯, 李大勇, 王宁, 王桂明, 张炳南, 李若彤, 潘立峰. 袖状胃切除术对肥胖伴2型糖尿病大鼠的作用及机制研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 638-642.
[13] 刘海旺, 施海, 尚利峰. 不同吻合器在腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术Roux-en-Y式吻合中的应用对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 643-646.
[14] 许杰, 李亚俊, 冯义文. SOX新辅助化疗后腹腔镜胃癌D2根治术与常规根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 647-650.
[15] 谢浩文, 丁建英, 刘小霞, 冯毅, 姚婧. 椎旁神经阻滞对微创胃切除肥胖患者术中血流、术后应激及康复质量的影响[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 569-573.
阅读次数
全文


摘要