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) ›› 2024, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (02) : 167 -170. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2024.02.014

论著

腹腔镜近端胃切除术中附加H-M幽门成形术与改良幽门肌切开术的近期疗效和生活质量对比研究
茆阳1, 张海涛1,(), 潘寅初1   
  1. 1. 215006 江苏苏州 苏州大学附属第一医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-05-10 出版日期:2024-04-26
  • 通信作者: 张海涛

A comparative study of short-term outcomes and quality of life between laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with additional H-M pyloroplasty and modified pyloromyotomy

Yang Mao1, Haitao Zhang1,(), Yinchu Pan1   

  1. 1. General Surgery Department, the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou Jiangsu Province 215006, China
  • Received:2023-05-10 Published:2024-04-26
  • Corresponding author: Haitao Zhang
  • Supported by:
    Suzhou Science and Technology Project(WS202122)
引用本文:

茆阳, 张海涛, 潘寅初. 腹腔镜近端胃切除术中附加H-M幽门成形术与改良幽门肌切开术的近期疗效和生活质量对比研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 167-170.

Yang Mao, Haitao Zhang, Yinchu Pan. A comparative study of short-term outcomes and quality of life between laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with additional H-M pyloroplasty and modified pyloromyotomy[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(02): 167-170.

目的

对比腹腔镜近端胃切除术(LPG)食管残胃吻合(EG)中离断迷走神经+H-M幽门成形术与改良幽门肌切开术的近期疗效和生活质量。

方法

选取2020年1月至2022年6月66例行LPG的近端胃癌(PGC)患者作为研究对象,采用随机数字表法将患者分为两组,每组各33例。两组均行腹腔镜近端胃切除术,采用食管残胃吻合。改良组术中行改良幽门肌切开术,传统组术中加H-M幽门成形术。数据应用软件SPSS 22.0处理,围手术期相关指标、术后生活质量等计量资料采用()表示,行独立样本t检验;术后并发症情况等计数资料采用[n%)]表示,行χ2检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、肠道功能恢复时间、胃管留置时间、术后住院时间、术后GCSI评分比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术后腹腔感染、吻合口漏、吻合口出血、胃排空障碍等近期并发症及吻合口狭窄、幽门狭窄、胃潴留等远期并发症比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),而改良组患者术后胆汁反流的发生率显著低于传统组(6.7%vs.30.3%,P<0.05)。随访期间,改良组患者胃食管反流量表(Gerd Q)评估总分较传统组显著降低,Chew-wun Wu特殊症状量表评估总分显著升高(P<0.05),且Chew-wun Wu量表评分结果显示,改良组在饮食量、饮食次数、饭后腹胀及胃灼热感上的评分均显著高于传统组(P<0.05)。

结论

与H-M幽门成形术相比,LPG中改良幽门肌切开术不仅降低了术后胆汁反流的发生,改善了患者术后胃食管反流症状,还提高了患者术后生活质量。

Objective

Compare the short-term efficacy and quality of life between laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) esophagogastrostomy (EG) with vagal nerve transection and H-M pyloroplasty and modified pyloric myotomy.

Methods

A total of 66 patients with LPG proximal gastric cancer (PGC) admitted to our hospital from January 2020 to June 2022 were selected as research objects. The patients were divided into the improved group and the traditional group according to random number table,each of 33 cases. Esophagogastric stump anastomosis and vagus nerve dissection were used in both groups. MP was added in the improved group and HMP was added in the traditional group. The data were processed by SPSS 22.0 software. Perioperative indicators, postoperative quality of life and other measurement data were expressed by (), and independent t-test was performed. Statistical data such as postoperative complications were represented by [n (%)] and χ2 test was performed. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intestinal function recovery time, indindent time of gastric tube, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative GCSI score between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative abdominal infection, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic hemorrhage, gastric emptydisorder and long-term complications such as anastomotic stenosis, pyloric stenosis and gastric retention between the two groups (P>0.05). However, the incidence of postoperative bile reflux in the improved group was significantly lower than that in the traditional group (6.7%vs.30.3%, P<0.05). During the follow-up period, the total score of the gastroesophageal reflux scale (Gerd Q) in the improved group was significantly lower than that in the traditional group, and the total score of Chew-wun Wu was significantly increased (P<0.05). The scores of dietary quantity, dietary times, abdominal distension and stomach burning sensation in the improved group were significantly higher than those in the traditional group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with H-M pyloroplasty, modified pyloromyotomy in LPG not only reduces the occurrence of postoperative bile reflux, improves the postoperative gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, but also improves the postoperative quality of life of patients.

表1 LPG术中两种幽门引流方式两组患者一般资料比较
表2 LPG术中两种幽门引流方式两组患者围手术期相关指标比较(
表3 LPG术中两种幽门引流方式两组患者术后并发症情况比较[例(%)]
表4 LPG术中两种幽门引流方式两组患者Gerd Q 评分和Chew-wun Wu评分比较(
[1]
曹毛毛,李贺,孙殿钦,等. 2000-2019年中国胃癌流行病学趋势分析[J]. 中华消化外科杂志202120(01):102-109.
[2]
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2021(6th edition)[J]. Gastric Cancer202326(1):1-25.
[3]
Sun KKWu YY. Current status of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy in proximal gastric cancer: Technical details and oncologic outcomes[J]. Asian J Surg202144(1):54-58.
[4]
《近端胃切除消化道重建中国专家共识》编写委员会. 近端胃切除消化道重建中国专家共识(2020版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志202023(2):101-108.
[5]
Lu SMa FZhang Z,et al. Various Kinds of Functional Digestive Tract Reconstruction Methods After Proximal Gastrectomy[J]. Front Oncol202111:685717.
[6]
Kolozsi PVarga ZToth D. Indications and technical aspects of proximal gastrectomy[J]. Front Surg202310:1115139.
[7]
Lovasik BPDodson TFSrinivasan JK. Heineke,Mikulicz,Jaboulay,and Finney: Innovators of Surgical Pyloroplasty[J]. Am Surg202187(5):737-740.
[8]
Kim D. The Optimal Pyloric Procedure: A Collective Review[J]. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg202053(4):233-241.
[9]
中华医学会外科学分会腹腔镜与内镜外科学组,中国研究型医院学会机器人与腹腔镜外科专业委员会. 腹腔镜胃癌手术操作指南(2016版)[J]. 中华消化外科杂志201615(09):851-857.
[10]
Zhao LNiu PZhao D,et al. Regional and racial disparity in proximal gastric cancer survival outcomes 1996-2016: Results from SEER and China National Cancer Center database[J]. Cancer Med202110(14):4923-4938.
[11]
邓褫夺,林学祥,李俊锐,等. 腹腔镜胃功能保留术与根治术治疗早期胃癌的临床比较[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202115(06):665-667.
[12]
Aizawa MYabusaki HNakada K,et al. Simple modifications of conventional esophagogastrostomy after proximal gastrectomy adequately reduces the postoperative reflux esophagitis: a retrospective analysis of posterolateral fundoplication[J]. Langenbecks Arch Surg2022407(7):3153-3160.
[13]
刘晓菊,姚芮. 近端胃切除术后两种消化道重建方式的安全性及生活质量对比研究[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)202014(03):285-288.
[14]
仲艳阳,陈学云,徐维清,等. 近端胃切除加幽门成形术对近端胃癌患者术后恢复的影响[J]. 临床医学研究与实践20205(29):32-33.
[15]
Shi MHu ZWu K,et al. Comparative Study of Pyloromyotomy and H-M Pyloroplasty in Proximal Gastrectomy for Adenocarcinoma of Esophageal-Gastric Junction[J]. J Gastrointest Surg202226(8):1585-1595.
[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] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 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.
[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