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 (06) : 657 -660. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2021.06.020

论著

3D腹腔镜近端胃癌根治术在直径>5 cm的T3-4期胃癌患者中的应用研究
牛福勇1, 韩永军1,()   
  1. 1. 719000 陕西榆林,榆林市第一医院
  • 收稿日期:2021-01-14 出版日期:2021-12-26
  • 通信作者: 韩永军

Application of 3D laparoscopic proximal radical in patients with T3-4 gastric cancer > 5 cm diameter

Fuyong Niu1, Yongjun Han1,()   

  1. 1. First Hospital of Yulin City Yulin, Shaanxi Province 719000, China
  • Received:2021-01-14 Published:2021-12-26
  • Corresponding author: Yongjun Han
  • Supported by:
    Science and Technology Project for Social Development in Shaanxi Province(2019SF048)
引用本文:

牛福勇, 韩永军. 3D腹腔镜近端胃癌根治术在直径>5 cm的T3-4期胃癌患者中的应用研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(06): 657-660.

Fuyong Niu, Yongjun Han. Application of 3D laparoscopic proximal radical in patients with T3-4 gastric cancer > 5 cm diameter[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(06): 657-660.

目的

探讨3D腹腔镜近端胃癌根治术在直径>5 cm的T3-4期胃癌患者中的应用效果。

方法

回顾性分析2019年1月至2020年6月3D腹腔镜近端胃癌根治术36例进展期胃癌患者(3D组)临床资料,选取同期接受2D腹腔镜近端胃癌根治术患者40例(2D组)进行比较。选用SPSS 22.0统计软件进行数据分析。脾门淋巴结清扫数目、清扫脾门淋巴结用时等计量资料以(±s)表示,采用独立样本t检验;并发症发生率等计数资料采用χ2检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

3D组手术时间、术中出血量、脾门淋巴结清扫数目、清扫脾门淋巴结时间、误伤脾脏发生率均小于2D组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者均进行了脾门原位淋巴结清扫,术中未见完全脾脏梗死,3D组术中出现脾门区出血1例,脾脏局部梗死1例,误伤脾脏2例;2D组术中脾门区出血3例,脾脏局部梗死5例,误伤脾脏9例;两组术中脾门区出血、脾脏局部梗死比较无显著差异(P>0.05),3D组误伤脾脏发生率显著低于2D组(P<0.05);3D组并发症发生率8.3%,2D组并发症发生率15.0%,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);随访时间6~18个月,中位随访时间为9个月。3D组随访率100%,有1例复发,无死亡例数;2D组随访38例,有2例复发,1例死于肝转移,两组患者复发转移率和术后生存率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

在近端胃癌根治术中,3D腹腔镜可缩短手术时间、减少术中出血量,脾门淋巴结清扫更彻底且降低脾脏损伤的可能性,其方式安全可靠,近期预后良好。

Objective

To investigate the effect of 3D laparoscopic proximal radical gastrectomy in patients with T3-4 gastric cancer >5 cm in diameter.

Methods

Clinical data of 36 patients with advanced gastric cancer receiving 3D laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy from January 2019 to June 2020 (3D group) were retrospectively analyzed, and 40 patients (2D group) receiving 2D laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy during the same period were selected. SPSS 22.00 statistical software was used for data analysis. Measurement data such as the number and time of splenic lymph nodes dissected were expressed as (±s). Independent sample t test was performed. The incidence of complications were tested by χ2 test. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, the number of splenic hilar lymph nodes dissection, the time of splenic hilar lymph nodes dissection and the incidence of accidental spleen injury in the 3D group were lower than those in the 2D group, with statistical significance (P<0.05). In both groups, there was no complete splenic infarction. In the 3D group, intraoperative splenic hilar hemorrhage occurred in 1 case, local splenic infarction in 1 case, and accidental injury to the spleen in 2 cases. In group 2D, there were 3 cases of splenic hilar hemorrhage, 5 cases of local splenic infarction, and 9 cases of accidental splenic injury. There were no significant differences in intraoperative splenic portal hemorrhage and local spleen infarction between the two groups (P>0.05). The incidence of accidental spleen injury in the 3D group was significantly lower than that in the 2D group (P<0.05). The incidence of complications was 8.3% in the 3D group and 15.0% in the 2D group, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The follow-up time was 6 to 18 months, and the median follow-up time was 9 months. In the 3D group, the follow-up rate was 100%, with 1 recurrence and no death. In the follow-up of 38 patients in the 2D group, 2 patients recurred and 1 died of liver metastasis. There was no significant difference in the recurrence and metastasis rate and postoperative survival rate between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

In radical resection of proximal gastric cancer, 3D laparoscopy can shorten the operation time, reduce intraoperative blood loss, more complete splenic hilar lymph node dissection and reduce the possibility of spleen injury. The method is safe and reliable, and the prognosis is good in the near future.

表1 76例进展期胃癌不同腹腔镜胃癌根治术两组患者一般资料比较[(±s),例]
表2 76例进展期胃癌不同腹腔镜胃癌根治术两组患者手术相关指标比较(±s)
表3 76例进展期胃癌不同腹腔镜胃癌根治术相关并发症发生情况[例(%)]
表4 76例进展期胃癌不同腹腔镜胃癌根治术两组术后并发症发生情况比较[例(%)]
[1]
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020, 70(1) : 7-30.
[2]
Liu K, Yang K, Zhang W, et al. Changes of Esophagogastric Junctional Adenocarcinoma and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Among Surgical Patients During 1988-2012: A Single-institution, High-volume Experience in China[J]. Ann Surg, 2016, 263(1) : 88-95.
[3]
黄昌明,许斌斌,林密. 3D腹腔镜胃癌根治术的优势与发展[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202014(6):541-543.
[4]
张珂诚,王鑫鑫,卫勃,等. 3D与2D腹腔镜胃癌根治术近期疗效对比研究[J]. 中国实用外科杂志201737(4):437-439.
[5]
Zhuansun D, Jiao C, Meng X, et al. A Study of Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopic Surgery in Resection of Congenital Choledochal Cyst of Children and Jejunum Roux-en-Y Anastomosis[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2020, 30(3) : 344-349.
[6]
Cheng J, Gao J, Shuai X, et al. Two-dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopy in Surgical Efficacy:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis[J]. Oncotarget, 2016, 7(43) : 70979-70990.
[7]
Patankar SB, Padasalagi GR. Three-dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Laparoscopy in Urology:A Randomized Study[J]. Indian J Urol, 2017, 33(3) : 226-229.
[8]
何裕隆,蔡世荣. 3D与2D腹腔镜胃癌根治的优劣利弊[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202014(6):544-548.
[9]
Dirie NI, Wang Q, Wang S. Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Systems in Urology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis[J]. J Endourol, 2018, 32(9) : 781-790.
[10]
中华医学会外科学分会腹腔镜与内镜外科学组,中国医师协会外科医师分会微创外科医师委员会. 3D腹腔镜手术技术中国专家共识(2019版)[J]. 中国实用外科杂志201939(11):21-26.
[11]
胡建昆,陈小龙. 3D腹腔镜近端胃癌根治脾门淋巴结清扫优势[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202014(6):549-551.
[12]
Ikeguchi M, Kaibara N. Lymph node metastasis at the splenic hilum in proximal gastric cancer[J]. Am Surg, 2004, 70(7) : 645-648.
[13]
Zhu GL, Sun Z, Wang ZN, et al. Splenic hilar lymph node metastasis independently predicts poor survival for patients with gastric cancers in the upper and/or the middle third of the stomach[J]. J Surg Oncol, 2012, 105(8) : 786-792.
[14]
Poudel S, Kurashima Y, Watanabe Y, et al. Impact of 3D in the training of basic laparoscopic skills and its transferability to 2D environment:a prospective randomized controlled trial[J]. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31(3) : 1111-1118.
[15]
郑民华,马君俊. 理念革新:微创外科新视角[J]. 中华消化外科杂志202019(5):478-481.
[1] 李凯, 陈淋, 向涵, 苏怀东, 张伟. 一种U型记忆合金线在经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 15-15.
[2] 杜晓辉, 崔建新. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术淋巴结清扫范围与策略[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 5-8.
[3] 周岩冰, 刘晓东. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术消化道吻合重建方式的选择[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 9-13.
[4] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[5] 王春荣, 陈姜, 喻晨. 循Glisson蒂鞘外解剖、Laennec膜入路腹腔镜解剖性左半肝切除术临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 37-40.
[6] 李晓玉, 江庆, 汤海琴, 罗静枝. 围手术期综合管理对胆总管结石并急性胆管炎患者ERCP +LC术后心肌损伤的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 57-60.
[7] 甄子铂, 刘金虎. 基于列线图模型探究静脉全身麻醉腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术后肠道功能紊乱的影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 61-65.
[8] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[9] 曹迪, 张玉茹. 经腹腔镜生物补片修补直肠癌根治术后盆底疝1例[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 115-116.
[10] 莫波, 王佩, 王恒, 何志军, 梁俊, 郝志楠. 腹腔镜胃癌根治术与改良胃癌根治术治疗早期胃癌的疗效[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 644-647.
[11] 鲁鑫, 许佳怡, 刘洋, 杨琴, 鞠雯雯, 徐缨龙. 早期LC术与PTCD续贯LC术治疗急性胆囊炎对患者肝功能及预后的影响比较[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 648-650.
[12] 陈大敏, 曹晓刚, 曹能琦. 肥胖对胃癌患者手术治疗效果的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 651-653.
[13] 孟飞龙, 华帅, 张莹, 路广海. 经脐单孔腹腔镜后鞘后入路在全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中的应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 658-660.
[14] 阿冲罗布, 陈颖, 谢德坤. 腹腔镜外囊完整剥离术治疗肝包虫病效果及对患者肝功能、预后的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 666-669.
[15] 索郎多杰, 高红桥, 巴桑顿珠, 仁桑. 腹腔镜下不同术式治疗肝囊型包虫病的临床疗效分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 670-673.
阅读次数
全文


摘要