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 (02) : 176 -179. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2025.02.016.

论著

改良管状胃—食管吻合术在腹腔镜近端胃切除消化道重建中的安全性及抗反流效果研究
李贞贞1, 王宏刚1, 崔丽丽1,(), 缪月琴1, 刘万璐1   
  1. 1.225300 江苏泰州,江苏省泰州市人民医院
  • 收稿日期:2024-03-28 出版日期:2025-04-26
  • 通信作者: 崔丽丽
  • 基金资助:
    江苏省卫生健康委科研项目(M2020084)

Safety and anti-reflux effect of modified tubular gastro-esophagostomy in laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for gastrointestinal reconstruction

Zhenzhen Li1, Honggang Wang1, Lili Cui1,(), Yueqin Miu1, Wanlu Liu1   

  1. 1.Taizhou People's Hospital Taizhou, Taizhou Jiangsu Province 225300, China
  • Received:2024-03-28 Published:2025-04-26
  • Corresponding author: Lili Cui
引用本文:

李贞贞, 王宏刚, 崔丽丽, 缪月琴, 刘万璐. 改良管状胃—食管吻合术在腹腔镜近端胃切除消化道重建中的安全性及抗反流效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 176-179.

Zhenzhen Li, Honggang Wang, Lili Cui, Yueqin Miu, Wanlu Liu. Safety and anti-reflux effect of modified tubular gastro-esophagostomy in laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for gastrointestinal reconstruction[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2025, 19(02): 176-179.

目的

研究改良管状胃-食管吻合术在腹腔镜近端胃切除消化道重建中的安全性及抗反流效果。

方法

回顾性分析2022年1月至2023年12月107例行腹腔镜近端胃切除术患者的临床资料,依据消化道重建方法不同分为2组,接受单纯食管残胃吻合术的52例患者为对照组,采用管状胃-食管吻合术的55例患者为观察组。应用SPSS 27.0软件分析数据。围手术期指标和胃食管反流病量表(Gerd Q)评分等计量资料用(x±s)表示,行独立样本t检验;术后并发症总发生率比较行χ2检验,并发症Clavien-Dindo分级比较行Z检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

观察组患者手术时间、吻合时间、并发症Clavien-Dindo分级与对照组相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);首次饮水时间、胃管平均每日引流量等指标较对照组明显改善(P<0.05);术后6个月内并发症总发生率低于对照组(5.5% vs.30.8%,P<0.05);术后7d,观察组患者Gerd Q量表评分低于对照组(P<0.05),观察组术后营养指标血红蛋白(HB)、白蛋白(ALB)、身体质量指数(BMI)均优于对照组(P<0.05);术后6~9个月,观察组有4例,对照组有16例患者出现轻度反流症状,所有患者体重浮动范围为术前体重的4%~5%,饮食基本恢复正常。

结论

腹腔镜端胃切除术的患者,管状胃-食管吻合术可改善围手术期指标,降低并发症发生风险,缓解胃食管反流症状,提升营养状况。

Objective

To investigate the safety and anti-reflux effect of modified tubular gastroesophagostomy in laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for gastrointestinal reconstruction.

Methods

The clinical data of 107 patients who underwent laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy from January 2022 to December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into 2 groups according to different methods of digestive tract reconstruction.52 patients who received simple esophagostomy were used as control group, and 55 patients who received tubular gastro-esophagostomy were used as observation group.SPSS 27.0 software was used to analyze the data.Measurement data such as perioperative indexes and Gerd Q scores were represented by (± s ), and independent sample t test was performed.The total incidence of postoperative complications was compared by χ2 test, and the Clavien-Dindo classification of complications was compared by Z test.P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

There was no significant difference in operation time, anastomosis time and Clavien-Dindo grade of complications between observation group and control group (P>0.05).Compared with the control group, the indexes of first drinking time and average daily flow of gastric tube were significantly improved (P<0.05).The total complication rate within 6 months after operation was lower than that of control group (5.5% vs.30.8%, P<0.05).7 days after surgery, Gerd Q scale score of observation group was lower than that of control group (P<0.05), postoperative nutritional indexes hemoglobin (HB), albumin (ALB) and body mass index (BMI) of observation group were better than those of control group (P<0.05); 6 to 9 months after surgery, there were 4 patients in the observation group and 16 patients in the control group with mild reflux symptoms.The weight of all patients fluctuated from 4% to 5% of their preoperative body weight, and their diet basically returned to normal.

Conclusion

In patients with laparoscopic end-gastrectomy, tubular gastroesophagostomy can improve perioperative indicators, reduce the risk of complications, alleviate gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, and improve nutritional status.

表1 两组腹腔镜近端胃切除术患者一般资料比较
表2 两组腹腔镜近端胃切除术患者围手术期指标对比(± s
表3 两组腹腔镜近端胃切除术患者术后6个月内并发症对比[例(%)]
表4 两组腹腔镜近端胃切除术患者Gerd Q量表评分对比(分,± s
表5 两组腹腔镜近端胃切除术患者营养状况对比(± s
[1]
Park DJ, Han SU, Hyung WJ, et al.Effect of Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy With Double-Tract Reconstruction vs Total Gastrectomy on Hemoglobin Level and Vitamin B12 Supplementation in Upper-Third Early Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial [J].JAMA Netw Open, 2023, 6(2):e2256004.
[2]
Kano Y, Ohashi M, Nunobe S.Laparoscopic Function-Preserving Gastrectomy for Proximal Gastric Cancer or Esophagogastric Junction Cancer: A Narrative Review[J].Cancers (Basel), 2023,15(1): 311.
[3]
Li X, Gong S, Lu T, et al.Proximal Gastrectomy Versus Total Gastrectomy for Siewert II/III Adenocarcinoma of the Gastroesophageal Junction: a Systematic Review and Metaanalysis[ J].J Gastrointest Surg, 2022, 26(6): 1321-1335.
[4]
Hipp J, Hillebrecht HC, Kalkum E, et al.Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing proximal gastrectomy with doubletract-reconstruction and total gastrectomy in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients: Still no sufficient evidence for clinical decision-making[ J].Surgery, 2023, 173(4):957-967.
[5]
Li L, Cai X, Liu Z, et al.Digestive tract reconstruction after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: A systematic review[ J].J Cancer, 2023, 14(16): 3139-3150.
[6]
Lu S, Ma F, Yang W, et al.Is single tract jejunal interposition better than double tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy?Updates Surg[ J].2023, 75(1): 53-63.
[7]
《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, 2020, 23(02): 101-108.
[8]
Yamamoto K, Omori T, Kurokawa Y, et al.Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer[ J].Am Surg, 2023,89(12): 5660-5668.
[9]
邹庆涛, 张洪贞, 尹作文, 等.食管胃结合部腺癌根治术三种消化道重建方式的临床效果评价[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 545-548.
[10]
Na YS, Kim SG, Cho SJ.Risk assessment of metachronous gastric cancer development using OLGA and OLGIM systems after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: a longterm follow-up study[ J].Gastric Cancer, 2023, 26(2): 298-306.
[11]
征程, 马婷, 张越, 等.胃大部分切除术与全胃切除术对胃癌患者预后影响的对比分析[J].现代肿瘤医学, 2023, 31(09):1677-1682.
[12]
欧雷, 罗之谦, 陈旺文, 等.改良食管残胃吻合术在近端胃切除术治疗食管胃结合部癌中预防反流的临床效果[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 403-406.
[13]
Saeki Y, Tanabe K, Ota H, et al.Intraoesophageal pressure in patients receiving proximal gastrectomy with hinged double flap method for gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study[ J].Ann Med Surg (Lond), 2023, 86(2): 712-719.
[14]
Singh N, Nugent Z, Singh H, et al.Proton Pump Inhibitor Use Before and After a Diagnosis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease[ J].Inflamm Bowel Dis, 2023, 29(12): 1871-1878.
[15]
王玉娇, 任珍.质子泵抑制剂联合伊托必利治疗胃食管反流病患者疗效及安全性分析[J].贵州医药, 2023, 47(02):269-270.
[1] 肖建, 肖天保, 陈江, 杨桃, 何峰, 保甜甜, 曹一波, 杨琴, 赵颖. 吲哚菁绿成像技术在保留左结肠动脉的直肠癌根治术中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 134-137.
[2] 金芳, 徐东飞, 尚培中, 张伟, 葛艳丽, 李晓英, 苗建军, 郭伟林. 腹腔镜直肠癌Dixon手术选择性应用超声刀和电钩的效果评价[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 142-145.
[3] 周丽君, 王露, 林巧. 腹腔镜与开腹直肠癌切除术治疗中低位直肠癌的疗效及并发症对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 146-148.
[4] 何可可, 顾海扬, 肖姝, 韦琪, 李鑫玉. 腹腔镜保留回盲部右半结肠切除术治疗右半结肠癌的临床效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 149-152.
[5] 陈宝鹤, 张文卓, 王隽. 头尾侧联合入路腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术的近中期临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 153-156.
[6] 李国防, 陈凯, 管文贤, 刘颂. 消化道术后吻合口漏小鼠动物模型的建立[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 162-165.
[7] 艾世超, 孙艺文, 宋鹏, 沈晓菲, 刘颂, 孙锋, 陆晓峰, 王萌, 管文贤. 静脉注射吲哚菁绿导航胃癌根治术的单臂开放前瞻性研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 166-169.
[8] 汪鑫, 向涵, 张伟. T型线联合超微创钳辅助经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(02): 133-133.
[9] 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.
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] 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.
[13] 伊力扎提·阿扎提, 吐尔洪江·吐逊. 腹腔镜活体供肝切取术的临床现状[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 30-35.
[14] 马子慧, 郭卫星. 腹腔镜肝尾状叶切除术的临床应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 36-40.
[15] 戴勇. 腹腔镜扩大左半结肠切除术(附视频)[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 82-82.
阅读次数
全文


摘要