腹腔镜D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近期疗效分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜与开腹胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近期疗效。方法:回顾分析手术治疗的89例进展期胃癌患者的临床资料,其中46例行腹腔镜下胃癌根治术(腹腔镜组),43例行传统开腹胃癌根治术(开腹组),対比分析两种术式的优缺点。结果:腹腔镜组与开腹组手术时间[(188.37±9.50)min vs.(167.33±6.76)min]、术中失血量[(65.54±6.34)ml vs.(111.05±14.74)ml]、术后排气时间[(59.74±14.86)h vs.(82.88±15.45)h]、术后进食时间[(61.93±14.90)h vs.(84.91±15.42)h]、术后镇痛药应用次数[(2.87±1.15)vs.(4.12±1.07)]及术后住院时间[(12.28±1.63)d vs.(15.28±0.77)d]等方面差异有统计学意义(P0.05);术后并发症发生率[2(4.35%)vs.5(11.63%)]、清扫淋巴结数量[(25.87±1.22)枚vS.(25.91±1.11)枚]差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:腹腔镜下D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌是安全、可行的,相较传统开腹手术存在多方面优势。     

腹腔镜与开腹肝癌切除术治疗原发性肝癌的近期疗效对比研究

目的:探讨腹腔镜肝癌切除术治疗原发性肝癌的根治效果及临床应用价值。方法:回顾分析2010年4月至2016年4月为178例患者行肝癌切除术的临床资料,其中腹腔镜组96例,开腹组82例。比较两组手术安全性、肿瘤根治性、术后恢复、并发症发生率等。结果:腹腔镜组均顺利完成腹腔镜肝癌切除术,无一例中转开腹。腹腔镜组手术时间[(234.7±69.8)min vs.(151.4±46.6)min]长于开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P=0.032);切口长度[(6.2±1.1)cm vs.(24.7±3.4)cm]、首次下床活动时间[(1.4±0.6)d vs.(2.9±1.1)d]、首次进食流质时间[(4.3±0.8)d vs.(6.7±0.9)d]、术后住院时间[(12.3±3.2)d vs.(15.1±4.2)d]优于开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组切缘距肿瘤距离[(2.3±0.8)cm vs.(2.0±0.7)cm]差异无统计学意义(P=0.387)。腹腔镜组术后发生并发症15例,开腹组发生12例,两组差异无统计学意义(P=0.621)。结论:对于原发性肝癌,腹腔镜肝癌切除术能达到开腹手术的根治效果,而且具有创伤小、安全性高、术后康复快等优势。     

功能型助手在腹腔镜胃癌根治术中的作用

目的:比较腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术中功能型助手与支架型助手的作用。方法:回顾分析2017年1月至2019年12月收治的122例行腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术(全胃切除,食管-空肠Roux-en-Y吻合术)患者的临床资料。其中,60例为支架型助手组(对照组),62例为功能型助手组(研究组)。对比分析两组围手术期及近期随访情况。结果:入组患者均顺利完成手术,无围手术期死亡病例。与支架型助手组相比,功能型助手组手术时间短[(208.1±34.8)min vs.(259.4±37.9)min,P<0.001],淋巴结清扫数量多[(30.2±7.4)枚vs.(26.0±6.4)枚,P=0.001],术中出血量少[(115.0±61.9)mL vs.(200.5±71.5)mL,P<0.001],切口短[(6.7±0.8)cm vs.(8.1±0.6)cm,P<0.001],首次进食流质早[(4.7±1.1)d vs.(5.2±1.3)d,P=0.033];两组首次排气时间[(3.8±0.9)d vs.(4.1±1.2)d,P=0.116]、引流管拔除时间[(9.0±2.5)d vs.(8.2±2.8)d,P=0.096]及术后住院时间[(10.7±2.8)d vs.(9.9±2.5)d,P=0.107]差异均无统计学意义。结论:功能型助手在腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术中优势明显,与支架型助手相比,具有创伤小、出血少、手术时间短、淋巴结清扫更彻底等优势,近期效果显著。     

直肠癌患者的腹腔镜手术效果研究

目的:对比腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗直肠癌的手术疗效,探讨腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的安全性与预后。方法:选择84例直肠癌患者,其中42例行腹腔镜直肠癌根治术(观察组),42例行开腹直肠癌根治术(对照组),对比分析两组患者的手术疗效。结果:观察组与对照组的全直肠系膜切除术完成率(88.1%vs.92.9%)、保肛率(81.0%vs.76.2%)、淋巴结清扫数量[(13.2±7.6)vs.(13.6±7.8)]、肿瘤近切缘距离[(10.2±5.8)cm vs.(10.1±5.4)cm]与远切缘距离[(3.5±1.2)cm vs.(3.6±1.3)cm]差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组手术时间长于对照组[(154.6±76.3)min vs.(122.1±57.5)min,P0.05],但术中出血量少于对照组[(98.3±47.6)ml vs.(174.4±82.2)ml,P0.05]。观察组患者术后住院时间[(9.2±2.3)d vs.(11.4±4.6)d]、术后排气时间[(2.6±1.1)d vs.(3.5±1.7)d]、术后进半流质饮食时间[(3.6±1.1)d vs.(4.3±1.4)d]、并发症发生率(11.9%vs.31.0%)均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者均无围手术期死亡病例。术后随访,两组患者局部复发率(2.4%vs.4.8%)及1年(83.3%vs.81.0%)、3年(78.6%vs.73.8%)生存率差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术治疗直肠癌可取得与开腹手术相同的疗效,且具有术中出血少、并发症发生率低、术后康复快的优点。     

两种胃癌根治术治疗早期胃癌的临床疗效比较

目的比较腹腔镜与传统开腹胃癌根治术治疗早期胃癌的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2006年2月—2011年2月接受手术治疗的112例早期胃癌患者的临床资料,包括腹腔镜胃癌根治术(腹腔镜组)55例和开腹胃癌根治术(开腹组)57例。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、肿瘤切缘、术后肛门排气时间、术后进食流质时间、术后住院天数、术后并发症、病理结果及随访等。结果腹腔镜组手术时间(196.5±48.9)min,术中出血量(142.3±142.7)mL,肛门排气时间(2.8±1.1)d,术后进食流质时间(5.1±1.8)d,术后住院天数(10.3±1.1)d,均显著低于开腹组[分别为(216.8±47.1)min,(246.0±148.4)mL,(4.5±1.5)d,(7.2±3.4)d,(13.2±3.6)d](均P<0.05)。腹腔镜组肿瘤上下切缘[(4.1±1.6),(3.5±1.5)cm],术中清扫淋巴结数[(13.2±6.9)枚],术后并发症发生率(9.1%)与开腹组[(4.0±1.8,3.6±1.7)cm,(14.3±7.7)枚,10.5%]比较差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。术后腹腔镜组中位随访24(2～66)个...     

腔镜胃癌保脾脾门淋巴结清扫术的临床应用研究

目的:探讨腹腔镜保脾脾门淋巴结清扫术在胃上部癌根治术中的临床疗效与可行性。方法:2012年5月至2014年10月为70例进展期胃上部癌患者行根治性全胃切除联合保脾脾门淋巴结清扫术。其中33例行腹腔镜手术(腹腔镜组),37例行常规开腹手术(开腹组)。对比分析两组患者术中出血量、手术时间、术后住院时间、淋巴结清扫数量及术后并发症发生率等情况。结果:两组患者均成功完成手术。两组患者手术时间[(250.97±51.21)min vs.(226.57±44.61)min]、术中出血量[(203.94±99.06)ml vs.(276.22±148.61)ml]、术后肛门排气时间[(4.64±1.11)d vs.(5.35±1.46)d]、术后住院时间[(12.09±2.65)d vs.(13.95±3.72)d]差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组脾门淋巴结清扫数量分别为(1.2±1.2)枚与(1.2±1.3)枚,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);腹腔镜组与开腹组患者术后并发症发生率分别为9.09%与13.51%,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:腹腔镜保脾脾门淋巴结清扫术能达到与开腹手术相同的根治效果,且具有安全、术后康复快等优点。     

进展期胃癌腹腔镜辅助与开腹全胃D2根治术临床疗效的比较

目的探讨腹腔镜辅助全胃D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌的应用价值。方法回顾性分析我科2012年2月~2015年7月83例进展期胃癌行全胃D2根治术的临床资料,其中腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术40例(腔镜组),开腹胃癌根治术43例(开腹组)。比较2组围术期情况、术后病理和术后生存情况。结果腔镜组3例(7.5%)中转开腹。腔镜组手术时间明显长于开腹组[(266.0±36.3)min vs.(226.0±28.5)min,t=5.602,P=0.000],术中出血量明显少于开腹组[(156.2±55.7)ml vs.(261.6±87.2)ml,t=-6.609,P=0.000],术后肠功能恢复时间[(3.1±1.1)d vs.(3.7±1.5)d,t=-2.070,P=0.042]和住院时间[(14.5±3.9)d vs.(16.0±2.6)d,t=-2.135,P=0.036]明显短于开腹组。2组术中输血率差异无显著性[60.0%(24/40)vs.65.1%(28/43),χ~2=0.232,P=0.630]。2组术后并发症发生率差异无显著性[35.0%(14/40)vs.44.2%(19/43),χ~2=0.730,P=0.393]。2组所有病例均为R0切除,淋巴结清扫数目[(24.9±6.0)枚vs.(26.3±5.1)枚,t=-1.163,P=0.248]、淋巴结转移率[85.0%(34/40)vs.86.0%(37/43),χ~2=0.018,P=0.892]、阳性淋巴结数目[(5.8±3.7)枚vs.(6.2±3.1)枚,t=-0.452,P=0.653]、肿瘤TNM分期(χ~2=0.673,P=0.714)均无显著性差异。2组生存率无显著性差异(log-rank检验,χ~2=0.774,P=0.379)。结论与传统开腹手术相比,腹腔镜辅助全胃D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌安全可行,手术创伤小、术后恢复快,且胃周淋巴结清扫效果同开腹手术一致,术后总体生存率不低于开腹手术。     

腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术的临床应用

目的探讨腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术的可行性及手术方法。方法行腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术15例,D1清扫3例,D2/D2 12例。全部病例均行毕Ⅱ式胃空肠吻合。结果15例成功进行腹腔镜手术。手术时间平均(218.6±31.6)min,术中出血量平均(132.4±21.3)ml,清扫淋巴结平均(33.4±13.6)个。肿瘤近端切缘(6.6±0.9)cm,远端切缘(5.4±0.6)cm,术后肛门排气时间平均(3.5±0.6)d,无手术死亡,无吻合口漏,术后并发肺部感染1例,经治疗后痊愈。术后随访1~10个月,无肿瘤复发或转移。结论腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术能达到与开腹胃癌标准根治术(D2)的淋巴结清扫范围及肿瘤切缘,且具有创伤小、出血少、术后恢复快等优点。     

腹腔镜胃癌扩大根治术与开腹手术的对比研究

目的:探讨腹腔镜胃癌根治术治疗T4b期胃癌患者的可行性及安全性。方法:回顾分析2013年1月至2017年12月收治的54例T4b期胃癌患者的临床资料。根据手术方式分为腹腔镜组(n=21)与开腹组(n=33)。采用SPSS 16.0软件进行数据分析。结果:两组患者临床资料差异无统计学意义。与开腹组相比,腹腔镜组手术时间[(244.2±73.50) min vs.(197.2±47.3) min,P=0.007)]更长,腹部切口[(9.8±3.4) cm vs.(20.3±5.1) cm,P=0.002)]更小,术后疼痛[(3.8±2.3) vs.(7.4±2.5),P=0.027)]更轻,术后肠功能恢复[(2.7±1.4) d vs.(4.1±1.8) d,P=0.035)]更快,术后住院时间[(7.3±2.1) d vs.(10.7±2.9) d,P=0.013)]更短。两组术中出血量[(205.1±114.8) m L vs.(150.7±87.5) m L,P=0.067)]、手术相关并发症发生率(5/21vs. 8/33,P=0.563)、非手术相关并发症发生率(2/21 vs. 2/33,P=0.638)、淋巴结清扫数量[(26.3±11.5) vs.(31.6±13.2),P=0.787)]差异无统计学意义。结论:腹腔镜胃癌根治术治疗T4b期胃癌患者安全、可靠,与开腹手术相比,具有一定优势。     

腹腔镜辅助与手助腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术的比较

目的探讨腹腔镜辅助与手助腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术的安全性及临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2012年1月~2013年5月行腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术210例资料,其中腹腔镜辅助手术120例,手助腹腔镜手术90例,比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、淋巴结清扫个数、术后首次排气时间和术后并发症发生率,并进行随访。结果腹腔镜辅助组与手助腹腔镜组手术时间[(121.0±2.1)min vs.(122.0±2.8)min]、术中出血量[(45.0±1.4)ml vs.(46.0±1.6)ml]、淋巴结清扫个数[(17.2±5.6)个vs.(16.8±6.6)个]、术后首次排气时间[(52.0±5.6)h vs.(55.0±8.1)h]、术后并发症发生率[6.7%(8/120)vs.7.8%(7/90)]差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜辅助与手助腹腔镜下行远端胃癌根治术同样有效、安全、可行。     

Effect of gastric bypass on gastric secretion.

Gastric bypass as a 90 per cent gastric exclusion operation was used in 393 patients with massive obesity to limit food intake. Stomal ulcer has occurred in 1.8 per cent of such patients or one ulcer per 140 man years of observation. The studies of indwelling fundic pH and of gastric acid secretion from the excluded stomach indicate that acid secretion is reduced after gastric bypass but that the acid, unbuffered by food in the excluded stomach, results in a lowered gastrin secretion after a meal. Thus, gastric bypass in inhibitory to acid secretion in most morbidly obese patients who do not have known acid peptic disease.     

Risk of gastric cancer after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of gastric cancer after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). DESIGN: Rats randomly underwent 1 of the following: RYGB, duodenojejunal bypass (DJB), or a sham operation. Postoperatively, rats underwent a protocol of cancer induction by means of both continuous (200 ppm in tap water for 16 weeks) and intermittent (50-mg/kg intraesophageal injection, once a week, for 12 weeks) administration of N-methyl-N-nitrosourea. SETTING: Institut de Recherche Contre les Canceurs de l'Appareil Digestif-European Institute of Telesurgery. STUDY ANIMALS: Fifty-five Fischer 344 rats. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Seventeen weeks after the operation, we performed a pathologic examination of the whole stomach in all animals to assess for the presence of cancer and/or premalignant lesions. Bilirubin concentration, gastric bacterial flora, and any other pathologic findings were also recorded. RESULTS: In rats in the sham and DJB groups, the incidence of gastric cancer was 85% and 75%, respectively (P = .63), whereas only 23% of rats in the RYGB group developed gastric cancer (4-fold reduction; P = .002). The remnant stomach of rats in the RYGB group also showed a lower bilirubin concentration (P < .01) and a lower bacterial count (P < .05) compared with both the DJB and sham groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that RYGB reduces the risk of gastric cancer in an experimental model of dietary-induced carcinogenesis. Lack of direct contact with carcinogens, lower bile reflux, and a lower bacteria concentration in the gastric content may be responsible for these observations. These data suggest that RYGB may be a safe option for the treatment of morbid obesity even in areas with high gastric cancer incidence.     

Laparoscopic gastric resection for gastric leiomyoma

Less than 2% of gastric neoplasms that are resected surgically are of smooth-muscle origin. Gastric leiomyomas are not encapsulated, and the distinction of benign from malignant leiomyoma may be difficult. Some of these tumors manifest malignant behavior. The histological basis for the diagnosis of benign or malignant smooth-muscle tumor is not entirely satisfactory, and misclassification occurs in some cases. The aggressiveness of those tumors reported as malignant is usually low, and the term malignant leiomyoma is usually used rather than the more ominous leiomyosarcoma. A case is presented of a patient with a 4.5-cm leiomyoma of the gastric antrum resected by the laparoscopic approach. Four laparoscopy trocars were used and multiple applications of the Endo-GIA were needed. Satisfactory margins of resection were obtained. The patient made an excellent recovery with minimal pain. She promptly returned to work and full physical activity.     

Effect of gastric mucosal denervation on gastric carcinogenesis]

Numerous nerve fibers containing various neuropeptides are found in gastric mucosa. They play an important role not only in regulation of gastric secretion, motility and microcirculation but also in regeneration and differentiation of gastric mucosa. These nerve fibers are reduced in chronic atrophic gastritis which is considered a lesion closely related to carcinogenesis. We investigated the effect of gastric gastric mucosal denervation (vagotomy) on gastric carcinogenesis by using two experimental rat models in which chronic atrophic gastritis is induced by duodenogastric reflux. At first, following administration of MNNG, vagotomy with duodenogastric reflux enhanced gastric carcinogenesis compared to reflux only. At second, in the model of gastric remnant in which no carcinogenic agent was given, both B-I and B-II gastrectomy with vagotomy showed an increase of carcinoma and/or adenoma at the anastomotic site compared to those without vagotomy. Moreover, in vagotomized groups, there were an increase of labeling index of PCNA positive cells in gastric mucosa and a marked reduction of intramucosal neutral mucin in PAS-Alcian blue staining. These results indicate that the lack of gastric mucosal innervation not only induces the decrease of gastric mucosal cell function and cytoprotection but also enhances the increase of immature cell regeneration.     

Proximal gastric exclusion for unresectable gastric cancer

Background: Patients with unresectable distal gastric cancer causing obstruction have classically undergone palliative gastrojejunostomy, but high mortality rates and delayed return of gastric emptying have been reported. The aim of the present study was to compare gastrojejunostomy and proximal gastric exclusion in patients with unresectable distal gastric cancer. Methods: Until 1996, patients with unresectable obstructing distal gastric cancer underwent antecolic gastrojejunostomy, but since 1997 we have performed proximal gastric exclusion for these patients. Mortality, morbidity, time taken to resume oral fluids and normal diet, length of palliation and survival were compared. Results: There was no mortality in either the gastrojejunostomy group (n = 4) or the exclusion group (n = 6). A single patient in the gastrojejunostomy group developed a sacral sore and another patient had recurrent vomiting following gastrojejunostomy. Exclusion resulted in a quicker return to diet and a slightly longer survival, although these were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Proximal gastric exclusion offers a safe, quick and life‐enduring palliation for unresectable malignant gastric outlet obstruction.