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) ›› 2025, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (01) : 72 -75. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2025.01.020.

论著

不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察
徐逸男1,()   
  1. 1.637000 四川南充,川北医学院第二临床医学院·南充市中心医院中西医结合肛肠科
  • 收稿日期:2024-05-06 出版日期:2025-02-26
  • 通信作者: 徐逸男
  • 基金资助:
    四川省中医药管理局科学技术研究专项课题(2020LC0147)

Curative effect of different operation methods in the treatment of obstructive left colorectal cancer

Yinan Xu1,()   

  1. 1.Department of Integrative Medicine and Anorectal Medicine, The Second Affiliated School of Medicine of North Sichuan Medical College·Nanchong Central Hospital, Nanchong Sichuan Province 637000, China
  • Received:2024-05-06 Published:2025-02-26
  • Corresponding author: Yinan Xu
引用本文:

徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.

Yinan Xu. Curative effect of different operation methods in the treatment of obstructive left colorectal cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.

目的

探究不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察。

方法

回顾性分析2019年1月至2021年1月103例梗阻性左半结直肠癌患者临床资料,根据实施手术方案分为择期组(行肠道支架联合择期手术,n=54例)与常规组(行常规急诊Ⅰ期肿瘤切除吻合术,n=49例)。数据利用SPSS22.0统计学软件分析。术后并发症发生率、Ⅰ期吻合率、造口率、开腹率等计数资料以[例(%)]表示,行χ2检验;围手术期指标、术后3个月肠道屏障功能[二胺氧化酶(DAO)、D-乳酸]等计量资料以(x±s)表示,行独立样本t检验;3年内生存情况采用Kaplan-Meier绘制生存曲线。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

择期组手术时间、术中出血量、淋巴结清扫数量、永久造口率及开腹率显著低于常规组(P<0.05),Ⅰ期吻合率显著高于常规组(P<0.05);择期组并发症发生率(13.0%)显著低于常规组(30.6%)(P<0.05);术后3个月,两组患者DAO与D-乳酸均显著上升(P<0.05),择期组显著低于常规组(P<0.05);所有患者均成功随访3年,中位随访时间27个月,择期组患者无进展生存期(PFS)为(31.6±8.3)个月,总生存期(OS)为(33.9±5.3)个月;常规组PFS为(33.0±6.6)个月,OS为(34.8±3.4)个月,两组OS与PFS均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

肠道支架联合择期手术在缩短手术时间、减少术中出血量、降低永久造口率及开腹率、提高Ⅰ期吻合率等方面均有显著优势,且患者预后良好,并发症少,值得应用。

Objective

To explore the curative effect of different operation methods in the treatment of obstructive left colorectal cancer.

Methods

Clinical data of 103 patients with obstructive left half colorectal cancer from January 2019 to January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed.According to the operative plan, they were divided into the elective group (receiving intestinal stent combined elective surgery, n=54 cases) and the conventional group (receiving routine emergency stage I tumor resection and anastomosis, n=49 cases).Data were analyzed using SPSS22.0 statistical software.The incidence of postoperative complications, stage I anastomosis rate, stomy rate and laparotomy rate were expressed as[ cases (%)], χ2 test was performed.Perioperative indexes and intestinal barrier function (DAO, D-lactic acid) 3 months after surgery were expressed in the form of (x± s ), and independent sample t test was performed.Kaplan-Meier was used to draw the survival curve for the 3-year survival.P<0.05 was statistically significant.

Results

The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph node dissection, permanent stomy rate and laparotomy rate of the elective group were significantly lower than those of the conventional group (P<0.05), and the anastomosis rate of stageⅠwas significantly higher than that of the conventional group (P<0.05).The complication rate of the selective group(13.0%) was significantly lower than that of the conventional group (30.6%) (P<0.05).Three months after surgery, DAO and D-lactic acid were significantly increased in 2 groups (P<0.05), and the selective group was significantly lower than the conventional group (P<0.05).All patients were successfully followed up for 3 years with a median follow-up time of 27 months.The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the selective group were (31.6±8.3) months and (33.9±5.3) months respectively.PFS and OS in the conventional group were (33.0±6.6) months and (34.8±3.4) months, and there was no statistical significance in OS and PFS in the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Intestinal stents combined with elective surgery have significant advantages in shortening operation time, reducing intraoperative blood loss, reducing the rate of permanent ostomy and laparotomy, and improving the rate of stage I anastomosis.Besides, the prognosis of patients is good with few complications, and it is worthy of application.

表1 两组患者一般资料比较
表2 两组患者围手术期指标对比
表3 两组患者并发症发生情况对比[例(%)]
表4 两组患者肠道屏障功能对比(x± s
图1 两组患者3 年内OS 与PFS 分析
[1]
Guo JN,Chen D,Deng SH,et al.Identification and quantification of immune infiltration landscape on therapy and prognosis in leftand right-sided colon cancer[J].Cancer Immunol Immunother,2022, 71(6): 1313-1330.
[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/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024,18(01): 5-8.
[3]
杨智岗,车鸣桦,黄海,等.肠道支架置入联合腹腔镜手术治疗梗阻性左半结肠癌的临床疗效观察[J].结直肠肛门外科,2023, 29(04): 363-367.
[4]
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(04): 241-258.
[5]
吴康,崔刚.左半结肠切除一期吻合加回肠末端造瘘治疗老年梗阻性左半结肠癌的临床效果[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(01): 99-101.
[6]
母崇靖,徐晨昶,金一琦,等.自膨式金属支架置入后择期手术与急诊手术治疗左半结肠癌伴急性肠梗阻患者的疗效比较[J].介入放射学杂志, 2023, 32(11): 1126-1130.
[7]
Hidalgo-Pujol M,Biondo S,Die Trill J,et al.Upfront surgery versus self-expanding metallic stent as bridge to surgery in left-sided colonic cancer obstruction: A multicenter observational study[J].Surgery, 2022, 172(1): 74-82.
[8]
曾维根,韩加刚,庞国义,等.肠造口后择期手术对比支架置入后择期手术治疗梗阻性左半结肠癌的效果分析[J].中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(04): 362-366.
[9]
Demarest K,Lavu H,Collins E,et al.Comprehensive Diagnosis and Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction: A Review[ J].J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother, 2023, 37(1): 91-105.
[10]
燕东,杨熊飞,张维胜,等.腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术对结肠癌患者胃肠功能的影响分析[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(05): 460-463.
[11]
封益飞,唐俊伟,王勇,等.肠道支架置入联合择期手术与急诊手术在梗阻性结直肠癌治疗中的对比分析[J].腹腔镜外科杂志, 2021, 26(03): 218-222.
[1] 马桥桥, 张传开, 郭开今, 蒋涛, 王子豪, 刘勇, 郝亮. 可降解止血粉减少初次全膝关节置换术失血量的研究[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 585-589.
[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]. 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 27-30.
[4] 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[5] 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 52-55.
[6] 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 56-59.
[7] 康婵娟, 张海涛, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入术治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的效果及对患者肝功能、炎症因子水平的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 667-670.
[8] 付成旺, 杨大刚, 王榕, 李福堂. 营养与炎症指标在可切除胰腺癌中的研究进展[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 704-708.
[9] 许杰, 李亚俊, 冯义文. SOX新辅助化疗后腹腔镜胃癌D2根治术与常规根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近期随访比较[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 647-650.
[10] 张钊, 骆成玉, 张树琦, 何平, 李旭斌. 不同术式治疗早期乳腺癌的效果及并发症发生率、复发率比较[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 494-497.
[11] 曾繁利, 齐秩凯, 杨贺庆. 两种经Glisson蒂鞘解剖路径肝切除术治疗原发性肝癌的肿瘤学疗效及风险比对[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 525-527.
[12] 刘明辉, 葛方明. MRI 对腹股沟疝修补术后患者早期并发症的评估价值研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 579-583.
[13] 孙昭, 刘琪, 王殿琛, 姜建武, 符洋. 机器人对比腹腔镜及开放式腹股沟疝修补术的Meta 分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 588-598.
[14] 张卫锋, 张天翼, 赵正维, 王海强, 尹逊亮. VE /VCO2 斜率对肺癌肺叶切除术后心血管并发症的预测意义[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 725-730.
[15] 冯熔熔, 苏晓乐, 王利华. 慢性肾脏病患者并发心血管疾病相关生物标志物研究进展[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 273-278.
阅读次数
全文


摘要