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) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (06) : 618 -621. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2022.06.010

论著

以第三级肝蒂为主导的解剖性肝段切除与非解剖性肝切除对肝癌患者的疗效比较研究
胡斌1, 赵伟1, 宦宏波1, 朱自满1, 韩明明1, 涂玉亮1, 王大东1,(), 蔡守旺2   
  1. 1. 100048 北京,中国人民解放军总医院第四医学中心肝胆胰外科
    2. 100853 北京,中国人民解放军总医院第一医学中心肝胆外科
  • 收稿日期:2022-08-21 出版日期:2022-12-26
  • 通信作者: 王大东

Comparative study on the efficacy of anatomic segmentectomy and non-anatomic segmentectomy with the third hepatic pedicle in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Bin Hu1, Wei Zhao1, Hongbo Huan1, Ziman Zhu1, Mingming Han1, Yuliang Tu1, Dadong Wang1,(), Shouwang Cai2   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery,The Fourth Medical Centre of Chinese PLA General Hospital,Beijing 100048,China
    2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery,The First Medical Centre of Chinese PLA General Hospital,Beijing 100853,China
  • Received:2022-08-21 Published:2022-12-26
  • Corresponding author: Dadong Wang
  • About author:
    Hu Bin and Zhao Wei contributed equally to this article
  • Supported by:
    The Fund of the Capital Public Health Project(Z151100003915155)
引用本文:

胡斌, 赵伟, 宦宏波, 朱自满, 韩明明, 涂玉亮, 王大东, 蔡守旺. 以第三级肝蒂为主导的解剖性肝段切除与非解剖性肝切除对肝癌患者的疗效比较研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 618-621.

Bin Hu, Wei Zhao, Hongbo Huan, Ziman Zhu, Mingming Han, Yuliang Tu, Dadong Wang, Shouwang Cai. Comparative study on the efficacy of anatomic segmentectomy and non-anatomic segmentectomy with the third hepatic pedicle in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(06): 618-621.

目的

研究以第三级肝蒂为主导的解剖性肝切除(AR)和非解剖性肝切除(NAR)对肝癌患者预后的影响。

方法

回顾性分析2015年7月至2017年12月期间89例行肝切除术的原发性肝癌患者的临床数据,根据手术方式不同,分为AR组(n=45)和NAR组(n=44)。数据采用SPSS 22.0软件进行处理,两组患者围手术期指标和肝酶谱变化以(

xˉ
±s)表示,采用独立t检验;术后并发症、切缘阳性率等采用χ2Fisher精确检验;术后复发率采用对数秩检验进行统计分析。P<0.05差异有统计学意义。

结果

AR组患者出血量、手术切缘阳性率明显低于NAR组(出血量:414 ml vs. 973 ml,P<0.01;切缘阳性率:0% vs.10%,P=0.056),术后6、12个月复发率明显低于NAR组(6.7% vs. 20.5%,P=0.058;15.6% vs. 40.9%,P=0.008);AR组手术时间明显长于NAR组(325 min vs. 270 min,P=0.041);AR组患者术后肝功能受影响小(P<0.01),两组比较均有统计学意义;术后严重并发症的发生率两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

相比于非解剖性肝切除,以第三级肝蒂为主导的解剖性肝切除治疗肝癌,患者术中出血量少、术后肝功能受影响小、术后复发率低,是更为合适的手术方式。

Objective

To investigate the effect of anatomic hepatectomy(AR)and non-anatomic hepatectomy(NAR)led by the third liver pedicle on the prognosis of liver cancer patients.

Methods

The clinical data of 89 patients with primary liver cancer who underwent hepatectomy from July 2015 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different surgical methods,they were divided into AR group(n=45)and NAR group(n=44). The data were processed by SPSS 22.0 software. The perioperative indicators and liver zymogram changes of the two groups were expressed as(

xˉ
±s),and independent t test was used. χ2 or Fisher exact test was used for postoperative complications and positive rate of surgical margin. The postoperative recurrence rate was analyzed by Log-Rank test. P<0.05 was statistically significant.

Results

The blood loss and positive rate of surgical margin in AR group were significantly lower than those in NAR group(blood loss:414 ml vs. 973 ml,P<0.01;The positive rate of surgical margin was 0% vs. 10%,P=0.056),and the recurrence rate at 6 and 12 months after surgery was significantly lower than that in the NAR group(6.7% vs. 20.5%,P=0.058;15.6% vs. 40.9%,P=0.008);The operation time in AR group was significantly longer than that in NAR group(325 min vs. 270 min,P=0.041). The liver function of AR group was less affected after operation(P<0.01),and the comparison between the two groups was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative serious complications between the two groups(P>0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with non-anatomical hepatectomy,anatomical hepatectomy led by the third hepatic pedicle is a more appropriate surgical method for the treatment of liver cancer,with less intraoperative blood loss,less postoperative liver function impact,and lower postoperative recurrence rate.

表1 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者一般临床资料比较[(
xˉ
±s),例]
图1 解剖性肝切除注:A、B=术中美蓝染色不同的肝段
表2 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者围手术期各项指标比较(
xˉ
±s)
表3 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者术后并发症比较(例)
表4 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者肿瘤的病理特征比较(
xˉ
±s)
图2 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者术后肝功能比较
表5 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者术后肿瘤复发情况比较(例)
图3 89例肝癌不同手术方式两组患者术后肿瘤复发率比较
[1]
陶一明,王志明. 欧洲肝脏研究学会肝细胞癌临床实践指南(2018)更新要点解读[J]. 中国普通外科杂志201827(7):813-817.
[2]
彭奋. 解剖性与非解剖性肝切除术治疗晚期肝癌的安全性及临床疗效对比观察[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)201610(3):238-240.
[3]
成超,彭彬,贾守洪. 三维重建技术辅助的肝切除术对肝癌患者的价值分析[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202014(4):381-384.
[4]
陈孝平,张万广. 中国腹腔镜肝癌手术20年回顾与展望[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202115(4):355-358.
[5]
刘允怡. 肝段为本的肝切除手术[J]中华普通外科杂志200318(2):123-125.
[6]
董家鸿,黄志强. 精准肝切除—21 世纪肝脏外科新理念[J].中华外科杂志200947(21):1061-1065.
[7]
Cucchetti ACescon MTrevisani F,et al. Current concepts in hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients[J]. World J Gastroenterol201218(44):6398-6408.
[8]
Cai SWYang SZLu WP,et al. Sustained methylene bluestaining to guide anatomic hepatectomy for hepatocellular car-cinoma:initial experience and technical details[J]. Surgery2015158(1):121-127.
[9]
蔡守旺,谢于,杨世忠,等. 持久美蓝染色法在精准肝切除中的应用价值[J]. 中华消化外科杂志20109(1):28-30.
[10]
Dong JYang SZeng J,et al. Precision in liver surgery[J]. Semin Liver Dis201333(3):189-203.
[11]
Lim KCChow PKAllen JC,et al. Systematic review of outcomes of liver resection for early hepatocellular carcinoma within the Milan criteria[J]. Br J Surg201299(12):1622-1629.
[12]
Cucchetti ACescon MErcolani G,et al. A Comprehensive Meta-regression Analysis on Outcome of Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma[J]. Ann Surg Oncol201219(12):3697-3705.
[13]
Yamamoto MTakasaki KOhtsubo T,et a1. Efrectiveness of systematized hepatectomy with Glisson`s pedicle transection at the hepatichilus for small nodular hepatocellular carcinoma:retrospective analysis[J]. Surgery2001130(3):443-448.
[14]
Wakai TShimi YSakata J,et a1. Anatomic resection independently improves long-term survival in patients with T1-T2 hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Ann Surg Oncol200714(4):1356-1365.
[15]
Imamura HMatsuyama YTanaka E,et a1. Risk factors contributing to early and late phase intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy[J]. J Hepatol200338(2):200-207.
[16]
彭淑牖,陆才德. 肝癌术后复发的类型和对策[J]. 中国实用外科杂志200020(3):132-134.
[17]
Cho AOkazuni SMakino H,et al. Anterior fissure of the right liver — the third door of the liver[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg200411(6):390-396.
[1] 高俊颖, 张海洲, 区泓乐, 孙强. FOLFOX-HAIC 为基础的肝细胞癌辅助转化治疗的应用进展[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 457-463.
[2] 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.
[3] 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.
[4] 常小伟, 蔡瑜, 赵志勇, 张伟. 高强度聚焦超声消融术联合肝动脉化疗栓塞术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的效果及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 56-59.
[5] 谢田伟, 庞于樊, 吴丽. 超声引导下不同消融术对甲状腺良性结节体积缩减率、复发率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 80-83.
[6] 赖全友, 高远, 汪建林, 屈士斌, 魏丹, 彭伟. 三维重建技术结合腹腔镜精准肝切除术对肝癌患者术后CD4+、CD8+及免疫球蛋白水平的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 651-654.
[7] 李伟, 宋子健, 赖衍成, 周睿, 吴涵, 邓龙昕, 陈锐. 人工智能应用于前列腺癌患者预后预测的研究现状及展望[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 541-546.
[8] 皮尔地瓦斯·麦麦提玉素甫, 李慧灵, 艾克拜尔·艾力, 李赞林, 王志, 克力木·阿不都热依木. 生物补片修补巨大复发性腹壁切口疝临床疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 624-628.
[9] 公宇, 廖媛, 尚梅. 肝细胞癌TACE术后复发影响因素及预测模型建立[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 818-824.
[10] 李一帆, 朱帝文, 任伟新, 鲍应军, 顾俊鹏, 张海潇, 曹耿飞, 阿斯哈尔·哈斯木, 纪卫政. 血GP73水平在原发性肝癌TACE疗效评价中的作用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 825-830.
[11] 陆镜明, 韩大为, 任耀星, 黄天笑, 向俊西, 张谞丰, 吕毅, 王傅民. 基于术前影像组学的肝内胆管细胞癌淋巴结转移预测的系统性分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 852-858.
[12] 焦振东, 惠鹏, 金上博. 三维可视化结合ICG显像技术在腹腔镜肝切除术治疗复发性肝癌中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 859-864.
[13] 吴雪云, 胡小军, 范应方. 肝切除术中剩余肝再生能力的评估与预测[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 894-897.
[14] 邓万玉, 陈富, 许磊波. 肝硬化与非肝硬化乙肝相关性肝癌患者术后无复发生存比较及其影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 670-674.
[15] 郭曌蓉, 王歆光, 刘毅强, 何英剑, 王立泽, 杨飏, 汪星, 曹威, 谷重山, 范铁, 李金锋, 范照青. 不同亚型乳腺叶状肿瘤的临床病理特征及预后危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 524-532.
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?