结直肠癌患者腹腔镜手术与开放手术安全性和远期疗效的比较

目的探讨结直肠癌患者腹腔镜手术与开放手术的远期疗效及其安全性。方法选取2006年1月至2015年8月广西玉林市红十字会医院150例结直肠癌患者,按照随机数字表法随机分为腹腔镜组和开放组,每组75例。腹腔镜组患者采用腹腔镜手术治疗,开放组患者采用常规开腹手术治疗。比较两组术后并发症、术后无瘤生存率及术后总生存率。结果腹腔镜组术后并发症发生率(12.0%)低于开腹组(34.7%),差异有统计学意义(X2=10.16,P<0.05)。腹腔镜组切口感染、肺部感染、肠瘘、肠梗阻及吻合口出血的发生率明显低于开放组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。两组患者下肢静脉血栓发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。腹腔镜组患者3年和5年无瘤生存率(66.9%和59.8%)高于开放组(65.7%和53.1%),差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。按病理分期进行亚组分析,术后无瘤生存率差异仍无统计学意义(P>0.05)。腹腔镜组患者5年生存率(70.1%)高于开放组(67.3%),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。按病理分期进行亚组分析,两组患者术后5年总生存率差异仍无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结果与开腹手术比较,腹腔镜治疗结直肠癌远期疗效好,且安全性较高,值得临床推广应用。     

全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术对胃上部癌患者的治疗效果对比

目的 分析全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术对胃上部癌患者的治疗效果.方法 选择胃上部癌患者94例,根据治疗方式不同将患者分为对照组(n=47)和研究组(n=47),对照组行腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术,研究组行全腹腔镜全胃切除术,比较两组患者的术后凝血功能指标、视觉模拟评分(VAS)、手术情况、术后恢复及并发症情况.结果 术后两组患者的凝血功能指标(APTT、Fg、D-D)均升高,但两组比较差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05);研究组患者VAS评分低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05);研究组术中切口长度短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.01);两组的手术时间、术中出血量、淋巴结清扫数目比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05);研究组患者术后下床活动时间、肛门排气时间、进食流质时间、住院时间均短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.01);两组患者的并发症发生情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05).结论 全腹腔镜全胃切除术对胃上部癌患者的治疗效果优于腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术,值得临床推广应用.     

3D和2D腹腔镜在直肠癌根治手术中的临床疗效比较

目的探究3D和2D腹腔镜在直肠癌根治术的临床价值对比。方法选取2016年5月至2018年5月我院就诊的114例直肠癌患者,采用随机数字表分组,分观察组和对照组,各57例,两组患者入组后完善术前准备,均行腹腔镜下直肠癌根治术,其中观察组患者采用3D腹腔镜下直肠癌根治术治疗,对照组患者采用2D腹腔镜下直肠癌根治术治疗,比较两组患者手术情况,包括手术时间、术中出血量、淋巴结清扫数目等;比较两组患者术后恢复情况及并发症发生情况;比较两组患者术后标本病理学指标;比较两组患者术后引流管留置时间。结论观察组患者手术时间、术中出血量较对照组患者明显降低,结果具有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组患者淋巴结清扫数目无明显差异;观察组患者术后并发症发生率较对照组患者明显降低,结果具有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组患者胃肠功能恢复时间、住院时间、住院费用等差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者术后病理指标,包括肿瘤距切缘下距离与标本长度无明显差异(P>0.05);观察组患者引流管留置时间较对照组患者明显降低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论3D腹腔镜下直肠癌根治术较传统2D腹腔镜下直肠癌根治术临床效果更好,并发症发生率更低,能有效缩短住院时间,对患者术后快速康复有一定积极。     

直肠癌腹腔镜与开腹全系膜切除术的疗效比较

目的比较直肠癌腹腔镜与开腹全系膜切除术的远期疗效和近期并发症。方法回顾性分析2007年2月至2010年3月间接受手术治疗的116例直肠癌患者的临床资料。行腹腔镜直肠癌全系膜切除术的64例患者作为腹腔镜组,行传统开腹直肠癌全系膜切除术的52例患者作为开腹组,比较两组患者近期并发症和远期疗效。结果两组患者清扫淋巴结数目、术后排气时间、引流管拔除时间和住院费用的差异均无统计意义(均P>0.05)。腹腔镜组患者的术中出血量、术后3 d内腹腔引流量、术中住院时间均明显少于开腹组,而出院满意度高于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。腹腔镜组患者的5年无病生存率明显高于开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论与传统直肠癌根治术相比,腹腔镜手术能更有效地改善患者的预后,提高患者的生活质量。     

两种腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术的临床疗效观察

目的分析两种腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术的临床应用效果。方法 2012年4月至2014年3月间收治的行腹腔镜胃癌根治术的胃癌患者50例,随机分为两组,分别实施腹腔镜下缝合重建的D2胃癌根治切除术(观察组)和腹腔镜辅助D2胃癌根治切除术(对照组)。结果 18例行腹腔镜下缝合重建的D2胃癌根治切除术,32例患者行腹腔镜辅助D2胃癌根治切除术,未出现中转开腹病例。观察组的手术时间显著长于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组的术中出血量和清扫淋巴结数目比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。观察组的术后镇痛时间和术后首次下床活动时间均显著短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);但两组的住院时间、术后住院时间、术后排气时间、并发症发生情况差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。术后随访,两组患者均未见复发现象。结论与腹腔镜辅助D2胃癌根治切除术比较,腹腔镜下缝合重建的D2胃癌根治切除术具有可以接受的手术时间和并发症发生率。     

腹腔镜辅助直肠癌根治术与传统开腹手术的临床疗效比较

目的探讨腹腔镜辅助直肠癌根治术对直肠癌的临床疗效。方法 2006年1月至2008年9月期间收治的直肠癌患者120例,根据手术方式不同分为腹腔镜和开腹组,每组60例。腹腔镜组患者采用腹腔镜辅助直肠癌根治术治疗,开腹组患者行传统开腹手术治疗,比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、排气时间、导尿管留置时间、术后住院时间以及手术前后血清CRP、IL-6水平,随访并比较两组患者1、3、5年生存率。结果腹腔镜组患者手术时间较开腹组长(P<0.05),术中出血量、术后排气时间、导尿管留置时间、术后住院时间均少于开腹组(P<0.05)。两组患者清扫淋巴结数目及并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。开腹组患者术后血清CRP和IL-6水平均高于腹腔镜组(均P<0.05)。两组患者1、3、5年生存率差异无统计学意义,腹腔镜组>60岁患者的3、5年生存率高于开腹组(P<0.05)。结论腹腔镜辅助直肠癌根治术与传统开腹手术的近期和远期疗效相似,但具有手术创伤小、患者恢复快、能够保护机体免疫功能等优点,适宜在临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜手术与开腹内外括约肌间切除术对低位直肠癌患者的疗效分析

目的 研究腹腔镜手术和开腹内外括约肌间切除术(ISR)对低位直肠癌患者的治疗效果.方法 选取120例低位直肠癌患者,根据治疗方式不同分为对照组和观察组,每组60例.对照组患者接受开腹ISR治疗,观察者患者接受腹腔镜手术治疗.比较两组患者手术前后1周的血清学指标(氧化应激指标和肿瘤恶性生物学指标)水平变化、手术相关情况(手术时间、术中出血量、有无预防性造口)、术后恢复情况(首次排气时间、恢复饮食时间、住院时间)、术后并发症的发生情况及5年生存情况,分析治疗效果.结果 术前,两组患者的血清Cor、GSH、E、SOD、VEGF、aFGF、bFGF水平比较,差异均无统计学意义(P﹥0.05);术后,观察组患者的Cor、GSH、E、SOD水平均高于对照组,而VEGF、aFGF、bFGF水平均低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.05).观察组患者术中出血量、术后首次排气时间、恢复饮食时间、住院时间均明显少于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.01).观察组患者术后并发症的总发生率为15.0%,低于对照组的31.7%,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05).随访5年,两组患者的无进展生存、总生存情况比较,差异均无统计学意义(P﹥0.05).结论 低位直肠癌患者无论是采用腹腔镜手术,还是开腹ISR治疗,均可根治性切除肿瘤,两者的长期生存情况无明显差异,但腹腔镜手术具有创伤小、出血少、机体应激反应低、术后并发症发生率低等优势,可以做到微创,且可保留患者的肛门功能,提高生存质量.     

无辅助切口完全腹腔镜下直肠外翻拖出式直肠癌根治术的临床应用价值

目的探讨无辅助切口完全腹腔镜下直肠外翻拖出式直肠癌根治术的临床疗效。方法选取2015年9月至2016年6月期间高州市人民医院收治的95例直肠癌患者,采用随机数字表分为观察组(n=47)和对照组(n=48)。对照组行腹腔镜直肠前切除术治疗,观察组行无辅助切口完全腹腔镜下直肠外翻拖出式直肠癌根治术。观察两组患者术中术后一般情况、术后并发症发生情况、术后排便情况和预后情况。结果观察组患者手术出血量少于对照组,胃肠功能恢复时间和术后平均住院时间短于对照组,住院费用少于对照组(P0.05);观察组患者术后并发症发生率低于对照组(P0.05);观察组患者术后2周内日均排便次数和术后半年内日均排便次数均高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);两组患者术后2年生存率和复发率比较均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论无辅助切口完全腹腔镜下直肠外翻拖出式直肠癌根治术安全可靠,疗效显著。     

腹腔镜直肠癌全直肠系膜切除术短期疗效和安全性的荟萃分析

目的评价腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术(LTME)在中低位直肠癌中的安全性和有效性。方法在Pubmed、Cochrane library和EMbase等数据库中检索1990年至2011年间发表的有关腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术和开腹全直肠系膜切除术随机对照试验的文献,由两位独立的研究人员进行文献筛选和数据提取,采用RevMan 5.1软件进行荟萃分析。结果 4项随机对照研究,共624例患者(LTME组308例,OTME组316例)符合入选标准。发现腹腔镜手术组手术时间延长,术中出血量较开腹手术组减少,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组淋巴结检出数量无差异(P>0.05)。两组术后总体并发症发生率无差异(P>0.05),各项具体并发症如伤口感染、吻合口瘘、肠梗阻、盆腔脓肿发生率在两组均无差异,死亡率两组比较均无差异(P>0.05)。腹腔镜手术组患者术后首次排气时间恢复早于开腹手术组(P<0.05)。同时LTME组流质和普通饮食恢复时间亦提前,LTME组住院时间较短,但差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 LTME安全可行,不会威胁并发症。腹腔镜TME是否可以达到与传统开放TME手术同样的远期生存,还需要更多的大样本高质量的多中心的前瞻性临床随机对照试验。     

腹腔镜超低位直肠癌根治术疗效的临床对照研究

目的 比较腹腔镜及开腹超低位直肠癌根治术的疗效.方法 选取超低位直肠癌患者76例为研究对象,根据随机数字表法将患者随机分为观察组和对照组,每组各38例.观察组采用腹腔镜超低位直肠癌根治术,对照组采用开腹超低位直肠癌根治术.比较两组患者的手术指标、术后恢复指标及术后随访情况.结果观察组患者的手术时间长于对照组,术中出血量少于对照组,系膜完整比例高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者的淋巴结清除数量、远切端距离及并发症发生情况比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组患者的排气时间、进食流质时间及导尿管留置时间均短于对照组,镇痛需要率低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者的随访时间分别为(30.3±4.3)个月和(31.4±3.5)个月;两组患者的肛门功能、术后复发及远处转移情况比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 腹腔镜超低位直肠癌根治术疗效可靠,且手术损伤小,术后恢复快,值得在临床治疗中推广应用.     

Strategies for the treatment of synchronous liver metastasis.

AIM: Observe the outcomes after complete simultaneous or delayed resection of synchronous liver metastasis (SLM) from colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: From 1994 to 2005, 119 patients were diagnosed with CRC and SLM; 57 patients had simultaneous resection (group I) and 62 patients had staged resection (group II). Perioperative chemotherapy was considered completed if all expected cycle were administrated. RESULTS: Overall survival rates of group I-group II at 1, 3 and 5 years were respectively 91%-93% (p=0,3), 59%-57% (p=0,09) and 32%-25% (p=0,06). The median survival time of group I-group II were respectively 46 months-40 months (p=0,07). There was no statistical difference on survival regarding location of metastasis (p=0,09) or primary tumor location (p=0,2). Patients with simultaneous or staged resection receiving optimal treatment (R0 liver surgery and complete chemotherapy) were respectively 89% and 67% (p=0,04). Twenty three patients developed isolated liver recurrence with higher frequency in staged patients (26% vs 9% p=0,03) without impairment of survival. CONCLUSIONS: Because of postoperative morbidity and prolonged tiring treatment, many patients having staged resection were under treated. However we did not observe statistical difference on survival but we supported that simultaneous resection has to be prefer to achieve an optimal treatment. Lung and bone metastasis are the new challenge for oncologists.     

Cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC for peritoneal metastases combined with curative treatment of colorectal liver metastases: Systematic review of all literature and meta-analysis of observational studies

Objective

Assess the overall outcome in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients that present with a combination of peritoneal metastases (PM) and liver metastases (CRLM) after curative resection and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the current literature.

Methods

A systematic literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines was conducted using the PubMed database of the U.S. National library of Medicine using the keywords: colorectal cancer, liver metastasis, extra-hepatic, peritoneal metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis, cytoreductive surgery (CRS), HIPEC and combinations hereof. Papers focussing on CRS and HIPEC for PM combined with curative treatment of CRLM were included, provided sufficient information on survival outcomes could be extracted. Duplicate publications were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed using the method described by Tierney et al.

Results

After screening and full-text assessment of 39 papers, six articles were included containing data on combined PM and CRLM in patients treated with curative resection of both sites and HIPEC or early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC). Three articles provided enough statistical information for meta-analysis. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) was extracted from survival curves and was 1.24 (CI 0.96–1.60). A comparison was made with patients presenting with isolated PM undergoing CRS and HIPEC and with patients with disseminated disease undergoing (modern) systemic chemotherapy.

Conclusions

In the absence of randomized controlled studies, we found in this systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with a combination of colorectal metastases in the liver as well as in the peritoneum show a trend towards a lower overall survival after curative resection and HIPEC, when compared to patients with isolated peritoneal metastases after CRS and HIPEC (pooled HR1.24, CI 0.96–1.60). However, patients with metastatic CRC show a tendency towards increased median overall survival after CRS and HIPEC combined with resection of liver metastases when compared to treatment with modern systemic chemotherapy.     

Changing trends in the presentation of colorectal liver metastases in a single hepatobiliary tertiary referral centre over fourteen years

Aim

National Institute for Clinical Excellence guidelines suggest that patients who have undergone potentially curative treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) should be followed up for 3 years. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the time to presentation with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has changed over time. This information, which is currently unknown, may inform future decisions regarding follow-up.

Methods

Patients presenting with metachronous isolated liver metastases between 1997 and 2011 were included. Timings of presentation with CRLM, rates of liver resection, survival data and factors associated with delayed presentation were investigated.

Results

269 patients were included in the study. Those having their primary CRC resection between 1997 and 2007 presented earlier with liver metastases over time (r = −0.33, 95% CI −0.45 to −0.20). However, 26% of patients who developed CRLM did so beyond 3 years. There was no significant difference in rates of liver resections for those presenting within, or beyond, 3 years (p = 0.21). There was no significant difference in survival for those presenting with resectable CRLM within, or beyond, 3 years (Exp(b) = 0.60, 95% CI 0.28–1.28). No factors associated with late presentation were identified.

Conclusions

These results suggest that CRC follow-up should be extended to 5 years. Follow-up interventions should be more frequent in the early stages reflecting the trend towards earlier presentation with CRLM. The economic implications of extending follow-up compare favourably to other NHS funded initiatives.     

力尔宁在腹腔镜结直肠癌患者加速康复治疗中的临床研究

目的探讨醋酸奥曲肽（力尔宁）在腹腔镜结直肠癌患者加速康复治疗中的临床应用。 方法收集2014年10月至2016年9月期间行腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的患者,随机分为力尔宁组（103例）和对照组（51例）。两组术后均不留置鼻胃管,对照组采用加速康复常规治疗,力尔宁组在加速康复常规治疗的基础上加用力尔宁02 mg 皮下注射,每8 h 1次,治疗3 d。观察两组术后治疗效果、术后并发症、再次置鼻胃管及术后排气时间、住院时间的差异。 结果力尔宁组5例术后出现腹胀,8例术后出现恶心、呕吐等不适,对照组中9例出现腹胀,10例发生恶心、呕吐,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P＜005）。力尔宁组有5例、对照组有3例均出现鼻咽部不适,两组差异无统计学意义（P＞005）。力尔宁组有3例、对照组有3例因术后肠梗阻、腹胀恶心严重而再次置鼻胃管,两组差异无统计学意义（P＞005）。两组在术后肠梗阻、肺部感染、吻合口漏等并发症方面以及术后恢复排气时间、住院时间方面无明显差异（P＞005）。 结论力尔宁可以有效减少腹腔镜结直肠癌患者术后的腹胀及恶心呕吐,可在术后常规安全使用。     

腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术与同期开腹手术的回顾性研究

目的回顾性分析比较腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术与同期开腹手术患者的临床资料,探讨应用腹腔镜技术行结直肠癌根治术的可行性。方法 2004年8月至2009年4月腹腔镜辅助下结直肠手术184例,右半结肠癌根治术37例,横结肠癌根治术11例,左半结肠癌根治术31例,直肠癌Dixon手术53例、Miles手术49例、Hartmann手术3例;开腹结直肠癌根治术患者718例（开腹组）,其中右半结肠癌根治术107例,横结肠癌根治术54例,左半结肠癌根治术131例,直肠癌Dixon手术288例、Miles手术117例、Hartmann手术21例,对照比较两组患者的手术及术后情况。结果两组均无术中、术后严重并发症和手术死亡病例,腹腔镜组有4例中转开腹手术。腹腔镜组与开腹组的平均手术时间分别为（210.5±26.5）min和（95.5±12.5）min,差异有显著性（P〈0.05）。腹腔镜组术中失血量明显少于开腹组〔（85.5±12.5）ml比（200.5±22.5）ml,P〈0.05〕。清除的淋巴结数量,直肠前切除肿瘤远端切缘长度两组间差异无显著性。腹腔镜组术后胃肠功能恢复时间明显早于开腹组〔进食时间：（4.5±0.5）d比（5.5±0.5）d,P〈0.05）。腹腔镜组住院时间明显短于开腹组〔（9.5±0.5）d比（12.5±0.5）d,P〈0.05〕。两组的3,5年生存率比较差异无显著性（89.8%比89.7%,P〉0.05;75.5%比74.5%,P〉0.05）。结论腹腔镜结直肠癌切除术安全、有效,具有可行性。     

‘Close Shave’ in liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

Introduction

The optimal size of clear liver resection margin width in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of margin width on long-term survival after liver resection for CRLM with a policy of standard neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

Consecutive patients (n = 238) who underwent liver resection for CRLM were included over a ten-year period. All patients with synchronous or early (<2 years) metachronous tumours were treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Data were recorded prospectively.

Results

Overall survival of the cohort at 1, 3 and 5 years were 90.3%, 68.1% and 56.1% respectively. The incidence of cancer involved resection margins (CIRM) was 5.8%. Patients with macroscopically involved resection margins had a poorer overall survival than those with microscopically involved margins (p = 0.04). Involved resection margins had a poorer overall survival (p = 0.002) than patients with clear margins. Width of clear resection margin did not affect long-term survival.

Conclusion

CIRM independently predicts poor outcome in patients with CRLM. Clear margin width does not affect survival. A standard policy of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy may be associated with a low incidence of CIRM and improved long-term outcome of sub-centimetre margin widths, resembling those with >1 cm resection margins.     

伴呼吸功能障碍的结直肠癌患者腹腔镜治疗的可行性分析

 目的　探讨伴呼吸功能障碍的结直肠癌患者接受腹腔镜治疗的可行性。方法　总结2007年8月至2009年11月收治的伴呼吸功能障碍的结直肠癌患者64例。遵循肿瘤根治原则,36例接受腹腔镜手术,28例行常规开腹手术。结果　腹腔镜组术后吸氧时间平均3.5 d,开腹组平均4.6 d（P＜0.05）;自主咳痰能力优于开腹组（P＜0.05）;腹腔镜组术后气管插管拔除时间平均21.2 min、开腹组平均23.9 min,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;两组患者术后血氧饱和度波动范围腹腔镜组略优于开腹组,但差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;开腹组肺部感染1例,两组患者均无肺不张、呼吸衰竭及泌尿系感染病例。结论　伴呼吸功能障碍的结直肠癌患者适合应用腹腔镜手术治疗。     

Laparoscopic liver resection compared to open approach in patients with colorectal liver metastases improves further resectability: Oncological outcomes of a case-control matched-pairs analysis

Aims

Liver resection is considered the standard treatment of colorectal metastases (CRLM). However, to date, no long term oncological results and data regarding repeat hepatectomy after laparoscopic approach are known. The aim of this study is to analyze single center long-term surgical and oncological outcomes after liver resection for CRLM.

Methods

A total of 57 open resections (OR) were matched with 57 laparoscopic resections (LR) for CRLM. Matching was based mainly on number of metastases, tumor size, segmental position of lesions, type of hepatectomy and type of resection.

Results

Morbidity rate was significantly less in the LR group (p = 0.002); the length of hospital stay was 6.5 ± 5 days for the LR group and 9.2 ± 4 days for the OR group (p = 0.005). After a median follow up of 53.7 months for the OR group and 40.9 months for the LR group, the 5-y overall survival rate was 65% and 60% respectively (p = 0.36) and the 5-y disease free survival rate was 38% and 29% respectively (p = 0.24). More patients in the LR group received a third hepatectomy for CRLM relapse than in the OR group (80% vs. 14.3% respectively; p = 0.015).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic resection for CRLM offers advantages in terms of reduced blood loss, morbidity rate and hospital stay. It provides comparable long-term oncological outcomes but can improve further resectability in patients with recurrent disease.     

Simultaneous curative resection of double colorectal carcinoma with synchronous bilobar liver metastases

Synchronous colorectal carcinoma (SCRC) indicates more than one primary colorectal carcinoma (CRC) discovered at the time of initial presentation, accounts for 3.1%-3.9% of CRC, and may occur either in the same or in different colorectal segments. The accurate preoperative diagnosis of SCRC is difficult and diagnostic failures may lead to inappropriate treatment and poorer prognosis. SCRC requires colorectal resections tailored to individual patients, based on the number, location, and stage of the tumours, from conventional or extended hemicolectomies to total colectomy or proctocolectomy, when established predisposing conditions exist. The overall perioperative risks of surgery for SCRC seem to be higher than for solitary CRC. Simultaneous colorectal and liver resection represents an appealing surgical strategy in selected patients with CRC and synchronous liver metastases (CRLM), even though the cumulative risks of the two procedures need to be adequately evaluated. Simultaneous resections have the noticeable advantage of avoiding a second laparotomy, give the opportunity of an earlier initiation of adjuvant therapy, and may significantly reduce the hospital costs. Because an increasing number of recent studies have shown good results, with morbidity, perioperative hospitalization, and mortality rates comparable to staged resections, simultaneous procedures can be selectively proposed even in case of complex colorectal resections, including those for SCRC and rectal cancer. However, in patients with multiple bilobar CRLM, major hepatectomies performed simultaneously with colorectal resection have been associated with significant perioperative risks. Conservative or parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies reduce the extent of hepatectomy while preserving oncological radicality, and may represent the best option for selected patients with multiple CRLM involving both liver lobes. Parenchymal-sparing liver resection, instead of major or two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar disease, seemingly reduces the overall operative risk of candidates to simultaneous colorectal and liver resection, and may represent the most appropriate surgical strategy whenever possible, also for patients with advanced SCRC and multiple bilobar liver metastases.     

腹腔镜与开腹结直肠癌根治术的近远期疗效比较

目的探讨分析腹腔镜下结直肠癌根治的安全性和可行性,对比其与开腹手术的近远期疗效。方法回顾性分析我院2006年1月至2011年12月间结肠及中上段直肠癌根治术患者的临床资料,其中开腹手术120例,腹腔镜下手术76例。分析比较两组患者的临床病理资料、围手术期情况及近远期生存情况。结果两组患者年龄、性别比较无统计学差异。腹腔镜组平均手术时间大于开腹组,分别为(226.28±61.09)min和(193.50±53.79)min;术中失血量腹腔镜组小于开腹组,分别为(84.00±28.41)ml和(187.60±37.27)ml;术后住院时间腹腔镜组小于开腹组,分别为(7.55±2.04)d和(8.40±3.39)d。两组患者肠管近端及远端切缘长度、清扫淋巴结数目以及术后感染性和非感染性并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义。开腹组与腹腔镜组结直肠癌患者术后3、5年生存率分别为76.8%、65.7%和76.6%、71.2%(P>0.05);Duke’s A、B、C各期两组患者生存率比较无统计学差异。结论腹腔镜结直肠癌根治手术安全可行,具有出血少、术后恢复快等优点,肿瘤安全性、并发症发生率及术后近远期疗效不亚于开腹手术。