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 (04) : 426 -429. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2021.04.020

论著

不同入路右半结肠癌扩大根治术治疗结肠肝曲癌配对研究
王润之1,(), 孙强1   
  1. 1. 236029 安徽阜阳,阜阳市第二人民医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-08-27 出版日期:2021-08-17
  • 通信作者: 王润之

Comparative research of laparoscopic radical resection in treating right colon cancers with different approaches

Runzhi Wang1,(), Qiang Sun1   

  1. 1. Department of General Surgery, the Second People’s Hospital of Fuyang City, Fuyang, Anhui 236029, China
  • Received:2020-08-27 Published:2021-08-17
  • Corresponding author: Runzhi Wang
  • Supported by:
    Anhui Science and Technology Project(1701042301); Key Projects of Medical Science Research of Anhui Health Department(2018A039)
引用本文:

王润之, 孙强. 不同入路右半结肠癌扩大根治术治疗结肠肝曲癌配对研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 426-429.

Runzhi Wang, Qiang Sun. Comparative research of laparoscopic radical resection in treating right colon cancers with different approaches[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(04): 426-429.

目的

研究腹腔镜辅助下尾侧中央入路右半结肠癌扩大根治术治疗结肠肝曲癌患者的临床效果。

方法

选取2017年1月至2019年6月均行腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌扩大根治术的50例结肠肝曲癌患者,根据手术入路不同,按照病例匹配法将患者分为尾侧组(n=25)和传统组(n=25),尾侧组行腹腔镜辅助尾侧中央入路,传统组行腹腔镜辅助传统中央入路。采用软件SPSS22.0进行统计学分析。围术期各项指标和血液炎症指标等计量资料采用(±s)表示,独立样本t检验;术后并发症等计数资料采用χ2检验;以P<0.05表示差异有统计学意义。

结果

与传统组围术期指标相比,尾侧组手术时间、排气时间、引流管拔除时间均明显缩短,术中出血量显著减少,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后7 d,尾侧组术后血清CRP、TNF-α、IL-6水平均显著优于中央入路组(P<0.05);尾侧组术后并发症显著低于中央入路组(12.0% vs. 36.0%,P<0.05);随访时间12~49个月,两组患者均无死亡发生,且均未出现复发和远处肿瘤转移。

结论

尾侧中间入路手术治疗结肠肝曲癌患者,具有操作更简便,节约手术时间短、术中出血少、住院时间短、并发症少等优势,安全有效。

Objective

To analyze the clinical outcome of laparoscopic expanded right hemicolectomy through caudal and/or medial approach for right colon carcinoma.

Methods

Clinical data of 50 patients with colon cancers located at liver flexure who underwent laparoscopic expanded right hemicolectomy from January 2017 to June 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. According to different surgical approaches, patients were divided into caudal group (n=25) and traditional group (n=25). Patients in the caudal group received laparoscopic surgery through caudal and medial approach, while patients in the traditional group received laparoscopic surgery through medial approach. SPSS22.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Measurement data such as perioperative indexes and blood inflammation indexes were expressed by (±s), and were examined by using independent t test. The statistical data of postoperative complications was examined by using χ2 test. A P value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant difference.

Results

Compared with the perioperative indicators in the traditional group, the operation time, exhausting time and drainage tube removal time in the caudal group were significantly shortened, and intraoperative bleeding was significantly reduced, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). On the 7th day after surgery, the serum levels of CRP, TNF-α and IL-6 in the caudal group were significantly better than those in the traditional group (P<0.05). Postoperative complications in the caudal group were significantly lower than those in the traditional group (12.0% vs 36.0%, P<0.05). Follow-up ranged from 12 to 49 months, no perioperative death, recurrence and distant tumor metastasis occurred in both 2 groups.

Conclusion

Caudal/medial approach is safe and effective in laparoscopic surgery for patients with colon cancer located at liver flexure, with advantages such as simpler operation, less operative time, less intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospitalization time, and fewer complications.

表1 50例结肠肝曲癌患者不同手术入路两组患者一般资料比较[(±s),例]
表2 50例结肠肝曲癌患者不同手术入路两组患者围术期指标比较(±s)
表3 50例结肠肝曲癌患者不同手术入路两组并发症发生率比较(例)
表4 50例结肠肝曲癌患者不同手术入路两组炎症反应比较(±s)
[1]
国家卫生计生委医政医管局中华医学会肿瘤学分会. 中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2017年版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志,2018,21(1):92-106.
[2]
王甲南,卢涛,崔大炜,等. 腹腔镜下全结肠系膜切除对右半结肠癌根治术患者手术效果及恢复情况的影响[J]. 中国内镜杂志,2020,26(3):38-42.
[3]
Nagasaki T, Akiyoshi T, Fukunaga Y, et al. The Short- and Long-Term Feasibility of Laparoscopic Surgery in Colon Cancer Patients with Bulky Tumors[J]. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2019, 23(31)1893-1899.
[4]
阿不都沙拉木·亚力昆,臧潞. 结肠肝曲癌的幽门下淋巴转移及清扫[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志,2019,22(12):1105-1109.
[5]
Hashiguchi Yojiro, Muro Kei, Saito Yutaka, et al. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2019 for the treatment of colorectal cancer[J]. Int J Clin Oncol, 2020, 25(1): 1-42.
[6]
吴鹏. 腹腔镜下结肠肝曲癌的幽门下淋巴结清扫[J]. 中国继续医学教育,2018,10(32):79-81.
[7]
Oshiro T, Komori K, Kinoshita T, et al. Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with radical lymph node dissection along the superior mesenteric artery using a multidirectional approach[J]. Dis Colon Rectum, 2019, 62(5): 638.
[8]
中华人民共和国卫生和计划生育委员会医政医管局,中华医学会肿瘤学分会. 中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2017年版)[J]. 中华外科杂志,2018,56(4):241-258.
[9]
An MS, Baik H, Oh SH, et al. Oncological outcomes of complete versus conventional mesocolic excision in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy[J]. ANZ J Surg, 2018, 88(10): E698-E702.
[10]
Cai G, Dai W, Cai S. Present status and future of multi-disciplinary treatment for colorectal cancer[J]. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi, 2016, 19(6): 607-611.
[11]
Gervaz P, Usel M, Raptie E, et al. Right colon cancer: Left behind[J]. Eur Journal Surg Oncal, 2016, 42(9): 1343-1349.
[12]
Zhang BY, Jones JC, Briggler AM, et al. Lack of Caudal-Type Homeobox Transcription Factor 2 Expression as a Prognostic Biomarker in Metastatic Colorectal[J]. Clin Colorectal Cancer, 2017, 16(2): 124-128.
[13]
余志清,杜江. 尾侧入路与中间入路行腹腔镜下右半结肠癌根治术临床效果对比[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2019,13(4):382-384.
[14]
陈庆永,帅晓明,陈立波. 中间尾侧联合入路行腹腔镜D3淋巴结清扫加完整结肠系膜切除术治疗右半结肠癌合并不全性肠梗阻的安全性和可行性[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志,2018,21(9):1039-1044.
[15]
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.
[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] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 冯旺, 马振中, 汤林花. CT扫描三维重建在肝内胆管细胞癌腹腔镜肝切除术中的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 104-107.
[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