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) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (03) : 279 -282. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2021.03.013

所属专题: 文献

论著

"翻页式"完全中线入路完整肠系膜切除术在右半结肠癌患者的价值分析
江雪峰1, 梁志宏1, 刘书强1, 吴秋美2,()   
  1. 1. 528400 广东省中山市小榄人民医院普通外科
    2. 528400 广东省中山市小榄人民医院妇产科
  • 收稿日期:2020-04-16 出版日期:2021-06-26
  • 通信作者: 吴秋美

The clinical value of laparoscopic " page-turning" complete mesocolic excision for right hemicolon cancer

Xuefeng Jiang1, Zhihong Liang1, Shuqiang Liu1, Qiumei Wu2,()   

  1. 1. Department of General surgery, Zhongshan Xiaolin people’s Hospital, Guangdong 528400, China
    2. Department of Obstetrics and gynaecology, Zhongshan Xiaolin people’s Hospital, Guangdong 528400, China
  • Received:2020-04-16 Published:2021-06-26
  • Corresponding author: Qiumei Wu
  • Supported by:
    Guangdong Province Medical Science Research Project(20180021)
引用本文:

江雪峰, 梁志宏, 刘书强, 吴秋美. "翻页式"完全中线入路完整肠系膜切除术在右半结肠癌患者的价值分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(03): 279-282.

Xuefeng Jiang, Zhihong Liang, Shuqiang Liu, Qiumei Wu. The clinical value of laparoscopic " page-turning" complete mesocolic excision for right hemicolon cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(03): 279-282.

目的

探究腹腔镜下"翻页式"完全中线入路(CMA)完整肠系膜切除术在右半结肠癌患者的临床价值。

方法

回顾性分析2010年6月至2019年5月68例右半结肠癌患者的临床资料,根据手术入路不同分为联合中线入路HMA组(n=30)和"翻页式"组(n=38)。采用统计软件SPSS 21.0进行分析,围手术指标等计量资料采用(±s)表示,行独立t检验;并发症等计数资料行χ2检验;Kaplan-Meier法绘制两组3年无病生存率(DFS)及总生存率(OS)曲线图行生存分析,以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

与HMA组比,"翻页式"组患者手术时间更短、术中出血量更少,清扫淋巴结数目较多(P<0.05);两组患者术后并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组术后3年DFS(76.7% vs. 73.7%)及OS(83.3% vs. 81.6%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

"翻页式"CMA术更符合无瘤操作原则,手术时间短,术中出血量少,清扫淋巴结范围更广,具有良好的临床应用价值。

Objective

To observe the clinical outcome of laparoscopic page-turning complete mesocolic excision for patients with right hemicolon cancers.

Methods

From June 2010 to May 2019, clinical data of 68 patients with right hemicolon cancers were analyzed retrospectively . According to different surgical approaches, the patients were divided into the hybrid medial approach (HMA) group (n=30) and the " page-turning" complete medial approach (CMA) group (n=38). Statistical analysis were performed by using SPSS 21.0 software. Measurement data, such as perioperative indicators and other measurement data were expressed as (±s), and were examined by using independent test . Count data such as complications were examined by using chi square test. Kaplan-meier method were used for analysis of the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). A P value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant difference.

Results

(1) Compared with the HMA group, patients in the CMA group had shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, and more harvested lymph nodes (P<0.05). (2) There was no significant difference between 2 groups in terms of incidence of postoperative complications (P>0.05). (3) There was no significant difference in terms of DFS (76.7% vs. 73.7%) or OS (83.3% vs. 81.6%) between the two groups 3 years after surgery (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The " Page-turning" CMA is more in line with the principle of tumor-free operation, with shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss and extended lymph node dissection, which has good clinical application value.

表1 68例行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者不同手术入路两组患者一般资料对比[(±s),例]
表2 68例行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者不同手术入路两组患者围手术指标比较(±s)
表3 68例行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者不同手术入路两组患者术后并发症比较(例)
图1 68例行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者不同手术入路两组术后3年DFS及OS情况
[1]
张忠涛,蔡军. 结肠癌多学科综合治疗协作组诊疗模式专家共识[J]. 中国实用外科杂志,2017,37(1): 44-45.
[2]
朱信强,黄海龙,蒋学通,等. 左右半结肠癌临床病理特点差异分析[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2019,13(5): 465-467.
[3]
丁锋,于金海. 联合中线入路腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌根治术[J]. 中国微创外科杂志,2019,19(8): 753-755.
[4]
李永坤,贾延印,刘耿,等. 两种不同入路方式行腹腔镜下右半结肠癌根治术临床效果对比[J]. 现代肿瘤医学,2019,27(22): 4036-4039.
[5]
马勇,杨建栋,罗涌,等. 腹腔镜下中间入路与侧方入路右半结肠癌根治术的术中、术后情况比较[J]. 现代肿瘤医学,2019,27(16): 2904-2908.
[6]
胡继霖,卢云. 左、右半结肠癌的差异[J/CD]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志,2018,7(6): 514-517.
[7]
李光伟. 完整肠系膜切除术治疗结肠癌的疗效[J]. 实用临床医学,2019,20(7): 26-27,30.
[8]
王琛,刘永永. 腹腔镜下右半结肠癌CME的争议与焦点[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2019,13(5): 437-439.
[9]
华烨,高云瀚,李中福,等. CME在腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中的应用分析[J]. 基因组学与应用生物学,2019,38(11): 5274-5278.
[10]
黄泉龙,金英虎,王贵玉. 结肠癌CME与D3根治术:平面与血管之争[J/CD]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志,2019,8(6): 627-630.
[11]
李洪波,伏广顺,韦伟,等. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中间入路手术体会[J]. 中国现代普通外科进展,2018,21(9): 724-725.
[12]
蔡正昊,刘海山,马君俊,等. 尾侧中间联合入路与传统中间入路腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术临床对比研究[J]. 中国实用外科杂志,2019,39(12): 1310-1315.
[13]
林中满,王德奋,吴惠慈. 腹腔镜下不同入路方式行右半结肠癌根治术的疗效及对免疫功能的影响[J]. 检验医学与临床,2017,14(19): 2941-2944.
[14]
郑民华,马君俊. 腹腔镜结直肠手术手术入路选择专家共识[J]. 中国实用外科杂志,2017,37(4): 415-419.
[1] 燕速, 霍博文. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治性切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 13-13.
[2] 母德安, 李凯, 张志远, 张伟. 超微创器械辅助单孔腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 14-14.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
[5] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 李华志, 曹广, 刘殿刚, 张雅静. 不同入路下行肝切除术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的临床对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 52-55.
[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


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?