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) : 92 -95. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2025.01.025.

论著

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
王露1, 周丽君2,()   
  1. 1.610014 成都,成都市第三人民医院手术室
    2.610014 成都,成都市第三人民医院住院部手术室
  • 收稿日期:2024-06-06 出版日期:2025-02-26
  • 通信作者: 周丽君

Effects of different anastomotic methods in total laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy on gastric function recovery and complication rate in patients with gastric cancer

Lu Wang1, Lijun Zhou2,()   

  1. 1.Department of Operating Room,the Third People's Hospital of Chengdu,Chengdu Sichuan Province 610014,China
    2.Operating Room of Inpatient Department,the Third People's Hospital of Chengdu,Chengdu Sichuan Province 610014,China
  • Received:2024-06-06 Published:2025-02-26
  • Corresponding author: Lijun Zhou
引用本文:

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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.

Lu Wang, Lijun Zhou. Effects of different anastomotic methods in total laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy on gastric function recovery and complication rate in patients with gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.

目的

探究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。

方法

回顾性分析2019年1月至2021年1月106例远端胃癌患者的临床资料,按照不同吻合方式分为毕Ⅰ氏组(行远端胃大部切除术、毕Ⅰ氏吻合术)与三角组(行远端胃大部切除术、三角吻合术),根据倾向性匹配评分排除混杂因素(卡钳值0.02),每组患者各53例。采用SPSS 22.0软件分析数据。围手术期指标、胃功能指标等计量资料以(±s)表示,组间比较行独立样本t检验;并发症发生率等计数资料行χ2检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

三角组患者手术时间、术中出血量、下床活动时间及首次进食流质时间显著低于毕Ⅰ氏组(P<0.05),两组患者住院时间、淋巴结清扫数目差异不显著(P>0.05);三角组患者并发症发生率显著低于毕Ⅰ氏组(P<0.05);术后1d两组患者胃泌素(GAS)显著下降(P<0.05),术后7d显著上升(P<0.05),且三角组恢复情况显著优于毕Ⅰ氏组(P<0.05),术后90d两组患者胃排空率、胃体蠕动次数显著上升(P<0.05),且三角组显著高于毕Ⅰ氏组(P<0.05);随访3年,中位随访时间27个月,两组患者无进展生存期(PFS)差异不具有统计学意义(Log-Rankχ2=0.884,P=0.347),两组患者总生存期(OS)差异不具有统计学意义(Log-Rank χ2=1.182,P=0.279)。

结论

远端胃大部切除联合毕Ⅰ氏或三角吻合术均可有效治疗远端胃癌,恢复患者胃功能,与毕Ⅰ氏术相比,三角吻合术在提高患者胃功能,降低手术并发症方面具有显著优势,值得应用。

Objective

To explore the effects of different anastomotic methods of total laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy on gastric function recovery and complication rate in patients with gastric cancer.

Methods

The clinical data of 106 patients with distal gastric cancer from January 2019 to January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed.According to different anastomosis methods, they were divided into Bi's group(underwent distal subtotal gastrectomy and Bi's anastomosis) and triangle group (underwent distal subtotal gastrectomy and triangular anastomosis).Confounding factors were excluded according to propensity matching score (caliper value 0.02).There were 53 patients in each group.SPSS 22.0 software was used to analyze the data.Measurement data such as perioperative indexes and gastric function indexes were expressed in the form of (x± s), and independent sample t test was performed between groups.The complication rate and other statistical data were χ2 test.P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, time to get out of bed and time to first feed fluid in triangle group were significantly lower than those in Bi Ⅰ group (P<0.05), while the length of hospital stay and number of lymph node dissection were not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05).The complication rate of triangle group was significantly lower than that of Bi Ⅰ group (P<0.05).Gastrin (GAS) in the two groups was significantly decreased 1 day after surgery (P<0.05), and significantly increased 7 days after surgery (P<0.05), and the recovery of the triangle group was significantly better than that of the Bi's group(P<0.05), and the gastric empting rate and the number of stomach peristalsis in the two groups were significantly increased 90 days after surgery (P<0.05).The triangulation group was significantly higher than that of Bi's group (P<0.05).Follow-up was 3 years and the median follow-up was 27 months.There was no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between the two groups (Log-Rankχ2=0.884, P=0.347),and overall survival (OS) between the two groups (Log-Rankχ2=1.182, P=0.279).

Conclusion

Distal subtotal gastrectomy combined with Bidi's or triangular anastomosis can effectively treat distal gastric cancer and restore gastric function.Compared with Bidi's operation, triangular anastomosis has significant advantages in improving gastric function and reducing surgical complications, and is worthy of application.

表1 两组患者基线资料比较
表2 两组患者围手术期指标对比(±s
表3 患者胃功能指标对比(±s
图1 两组患者3 年内生存曲线 注:A=OS;B=PFS。
[1]
黄勇,王静,鲍广建,等.胃癌组织中AEG-1、HER2的表达及临床意义[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2020,14(05): 487-490.
[2]
Huang C, Liu H, Hu Y, et al.Laparoscopic vs Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Five-Year Outcomes From the CLASS-01 Randomized Clinical Tria[lJ].JAMA Surg, 2022, 157(1): 9-17.
[3]
王斌儒,景钦东,陈康,等.远端胃切除毕Ⅰ式吻合术后肠套叠1例[J].兰州大学学报(医学版),2020, 46(01): 85-87.
[4]
余涛,张超.3D腹腔镜平行重叠吻合法联合NOSE在右半结肠癌切除术中的应用研究[J].中国现代普通外科进展,2023,26(08): 621-624.
[5]
李勇,范立侨.胃癌[M].科技文献出版社,2010, 125: 165.
[6]
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,中国抗癌协会腔镜与机器人外科分会,等.腹腔镜胃癌手术操作指南(2023版)[J].中华消化外科杂志,2023, 22(04): 425-436.
[7]
申旭旗,付歆颖,黄连顺,等.三角吻合术在腹腔镜远端胃切除术后消化道重建中的应用价值[J].重庆医学,2021, 50(06):932-936.
[8]
赵云,邓仲鸣.手助腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术在进展期胃癌中的临床效果对比研究[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2020, 14(01): 81-85.
[9]
王锐,李军,王欣成.腹腔镜根治术联合三角吻合术治疗早期胃癌的安全性[J].癌症进展,2022, 20(05): 475-478.
[10]
李锋,彭德伟,王梦桥,等.Delta-shaped术和BillrothⅠ术在腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术中的应用效果[J].西部医学,2020,32(03): 452-455.
[11]
陈徽,朱晓明,罗振凌,等.胃癌根治术后3种胃肠道重建术式的治疗效果及并发症的比较[J].天津医药,2022, 50(10):1066-1071.
[12]
张一帆.全腹腔镜下远端胃切除术联合三角吻合术治疗胃癌的临床研究[J].实用癌症杂志,2021, 36(09): 1521-1523,1527.
[13]
王艳良,陈涛.腹腔镜远端胃切除联合三角吻合术治疗对胃癌患者围术期指标、肠道功能恢复及术后并发症的影响[J].空军医学杂志,2019, 35(03): 242-245.
[14]
Huet E, Chati R, Martre P, et al.Semi-mechanical triangular anastomosis during Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Surgical technique[J].J Visc Surg, 2023, 160(3): 219-224.
[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]. 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]. 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]. 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]. 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]. 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]. 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]. 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]. 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 60-63.
[13] 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]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 88-91.
[14] 王万里, 郭兵, 何凯, 黄汉生. 腹腔镜下肝门部胆管癌根治术[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 143-.
[15] 李凯, 陈淋, 苏怀东, 向涵, 张伟. 超微创器械在改良单孔腹腔镜巨大肝囊肿开窗引流及胆囊切除中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 144-.
阅读次数
全文


摘要