腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术治疗早期前列腺癌的临床经验(附10例报告)

目的：总结腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术治疗早期前列腺癌的手术经验。方法：采用前列腺特异抗原检测和前列腺穿刺筛选10例PT1b～PT3a前列腺癌患者，用腹腔镜行前列腺癌根治术，总结手术时间、出血量和并发症的发生情况，并进行术后随访。结果：10例腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术均获成功。手术时间210～310min，平均250min；出血量200～500ml，平均340ml。术中发生大出血2例，术后尿外渗1例，未出现尿失禁和排尿困难。结论：腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术涉及较多腹腔镜下分离、切割、止血和缝合技术，只有熟悉前列腺的局部解剖、使用良好的腹腔镜器械、熟练掌握各种腹腔镜操作技术，才能缩短手术时间，减少手术并发症的发生。     

腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术10例

目的探讨腹腔镜经腹腔途径前列腺癌根治术的可行性. 方法采用Montsouris七步法行腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术. 结果 10例手术均获成功.手术时间330～540 min,平均433 min.术中出血量100～550 ml,平均274 ml,均未输血.膀胱损伤1例,当即予以缝合.术后住院时15～23 d,平均17 d.拔除导尿管时间14～23 d,平均16 d;尿漏2例分别于术后20、23 d后拔除痊愈;余8例术后2周拔除.3例出现轻度尿失禁,辅助治疗4周后消失.病检pT1c 3例,pT2 6例,pT3 1例.随访3～21个月,平均7.5月.术后PSA 0～2.70 μg/L,平均0.05 μg/L.2例性功能恢复. 结论严格掌握手术适应证,充分的术前准备,Montsouris七步法腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术可行.     

经改良腹膜后径路腹腔镜下腹膜后淋巴结清扫术：附9例报告

目的探讨腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的临床可行性,并总结手术技巧。方法对9例睾丸非精原细胞瘤型生殖细胞瘤患者,行根治性睾丸切除术后平均27d行改良腹膜后径路腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术。结果 9例手术均获成功,术中发生下腔静脉损伤1例,腹腔镜下缝合。平均手术时间170min,平均出血量330ml,术后肠功能恢复时间约2d,引流管均于术后第3天拔除,平均住院时间7d。术后随访分别为18±8个月,无复发及转移。结论经改良腹膜后径路行腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫可避免对腹腔脏器的影响,解剖结构显露较满意,具有创伤小、恢复快等优点,是一种临床可进一步应用的手术方式。     

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy in complex surgical cases

PURPOSE: Patients with a high body mass index, previous pelvic surgery or large prostate size are not considered ideal candidates for radical prostatectomy. We assessed the impact of body mass index, previous pelvic surgery and prostate weight on perioperative and pathological outcomes in patients treated exclusively with laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2004 to May 2005, 300 patients underwent laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. Patients were divided into groups, including body mass index groups 1 (25 kg/m(2) or less), 2 (25.1 to 30), 3 (30.1 to 36) and 4 (greater than 36); prostate weight groups 1 (20 gm or less), 2 (20.1 to 40), 3 (40.1 to 60) and 4 (more than 60); and prior surgery groups 1 (no previous pelvic or prostatic surgery) and 2 (previous pelvic or prostatic surgery). RESULTS: Logistic regression demonstrated that body mass index, large prostate size and previous pelvic surgery did not affect margin status. The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to analyze if body mass index, large prostate size and previous pelvic surgery had an effect on perioperative variables. Only prostate weight correlated with a delay in Foley catheter removal (3 days, p=0.0005). The Wilcoxon rank sum test showed that patients with a higher body mass index had a slightly prolonged hospital stay (16 hours, p=0.02). Patients with a prostate of more than 40 gm had slightly increased blood loss (56 cc, p=0.03), which did not affect the transfusion rate. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy can be performed in complex surgical cases without increased perioperative morbidity. Obese patients and those with a large prostate who prefer surgery as a treatment option for localized prostate cancer may benefit from the advantages that laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy offers.     

腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(附八例报告)

目的：总结腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术的体会。方法：8例均为pT1b-pT2期前列腺癌患者。腹腔镜下采用“5孔7步法“，经腹分别行膀胱后入路和前入路分离前列腺、切开膀胱颈、前列腺两侧分离、前列腺尖部切除、膀胱尿道吻合。结果：8例患者手术时间5-11h，平均7.3h。出血量200-1000ml，平均620ml。术后患者恢复良好，3周后拔除尿管排尿通畅，随访3-18个月无尿失禁等并发症发生。结论：腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术有良好的解剖影像，利于术中操作，减少术中出血，更好地保护重要解剖结构，术后恢复迅速。     

腹腔镜根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路肿瘤

目的:评价腹腔镜根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路移行细胞癌的有效性和安全性.方法:对26例上尿路肿瘤患者,其中2例曾有同侧肾移植史,行腹腔镜根治性肾输尿管切除及膀胱黏膜袖套状切除术,并记录其有关指标.结果:26例均手术成功,其中3例采用经腹腔途径,23例经后腹腔途径.平均手术时间120 min,术中出血量46 ml,术后住院时间10.5 d,恢复正常活动时间4.1周.20例随访6～38个月,1例局部腹膜后肿瘤复发,1例膀胱内复发;无远处转移及穿刺通道的种植性转移.结论:腹腔镜根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路移行细胞癌是安全、有效的微创手术方法,但其对肿瘤细胞生物学行为的影响尚需作进一步的评价.     

经腹腔镜全膀胱切除术(附五例报告)

目的　介绍腹腔镜下全膀胱切除的经验。　方法　浸润性膀胱癌患者 5例 ,男 4女 1,年龄 4 9～ 6 8岁 ,无远处转移。腹腔镜下行全膀胱切除术 ,前列腺切除或子宫次全切除。经腹壁造口取出切除物 ,行乙状结肠去带原位新膀胱术。　结果　 5例手术成功 ,手术时间 2 10～ 2 70min ,开放原位新膀胱术时间 2 10～ 30 0min。腹腔镜手术中 ,以超声刀及双极电刀行膀胱侧韧带、前列腺血管蒂及前列腺尖部切断止血 ,未使用钛夹、结扎及Endo gal夹 ,术中及术后未见明显出血。腹腔镜下操作出血量 2 0 0ml,开放性原位新膀胱术出血量 4 0 0～ 80 0ml,输浓缩红细胞 0～ 4个单位。术后 4～ 5d恢复饮食 ,3周拔除输尿管支架管 ,4周拔除尿管。患者白天可完全控制排尿 ,2例夜间偶有尿失禁。术后病理证实 5例均为多发性浸润性膀胱癌 ,2～ 3级。肌层有不同程度浸润 ,膀胱外组织切缘及局部淋巴结未见肿瘤细胞浸润。 5例均未发生手术并发症。　结论　腹腔镜下膀胱根治切除术创伤小、出血少、恢复快 ,是全膀胱切除手术的一种很有前景的方法。     

159例腹腔镜根治性前列腺癌切除术的疗效评估

目的探讨腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的疗效.方法回顾性分析2000年3月至2003年8月159例腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术患者资料.平均年龄58岁（42～74岁）,同时行双侧盆腔淋巴结清扫术57例（35.9%）.术前159例患者前列腺活检均确诊为前列腺癌.Gleason肿瘤分级：3＋3：129例（81.1%）,3＋4：23例（14.5%）,4＋3：4例（2.5%）,4＋4：3例（1.9%）.TNM肿瘤分期：T1c126例（79.3%）,T2a 33例（20.7%）.结果 159例患者平均手术时间298 min（165～660min）.术中估计失血量平均293 ml（50～2500 ml）,发生严重并发症15例（9.4%）,其中中转开放手术6例（3.8%）,无死亡病例.术后病理确诊为前列腺癌158例,1例诊断为良性前列腺增生伴急性前列腺炎.标本切缘阳性34例（21.5%）.术后1年53例患者获得随访,术前31例（58.5%）有阴茎勃起功能的患者根据国际阴茎勃起功能指数（ⅡEF-5）评分分组进行术后变化评估.术后ⅡEF-5评分显著下降,各评分组间的差异无统计学意义.36例（67.9%）可通过使用Viagra等药物进行性生活,6例（11.3%）有尿失禁.结论腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术是一种相对安全、微创、并发症低、术后康复快,同时又能达到肿瘤治疗效果的手术方法.但长期疗效尚待进一步观察.     

腹腔镜下根治性全膀胱切除术100例总结

目的 总结腹腔镜下全膀胱切除的经验.方法 2002 年8 月至2007 年6月治疗浸润性膀胱癌100例,男82例,女18例,年龄32～81岁,无远处转移.腹腔镜下行盆腔淋巴结清扫,全膀胱切除,前列腺切除或子宫次全切除.经腹壁造口取出切除物,行乙状结肠去带原位新膀胱术.结果 100例腹腔镜下手术成功,手术时间80～270 min(平均150 min);开放原位新膀胱术160～300 min(平均210 min).腹腔镜下操作出血量100～300 ml(平均180 ml);开放性原位新膀胱术出血量400～800 ml;术中、术后输浓缩红细胞0～400 ml(平均200 ml).术后4～8 d恢复饮食,3周拔除输尿管支架管,4周拔除尿管.结论 腹腔镜下根治性全膀胱切除术创伤小、出血少、术中操作精细、盆腔淋巴结清扫彻底、术后恢复快,可作为全膀胱切除手术的首选方法.     

腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术9例报告

目的探讨腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的手术技术和临床可行性。方法9例原发性睾丸非精原细胞性生殖细胞肿瘤根治性睾丸切除术后平均(4.6±1.3)周行腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术(laparoscopicretroperitoneallymphnodedissection,L-RLND),记录手术时间、出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、引流管拔除时间、住院时间和术中、术后并发症,并进行术后随访。结果9例L-RLND均获成功。手术时间(148±9)min,术中出血量(66±8)ml,术后肠功能恢复时间24～48h,住院时间(7.5±1.8)d。术中发生下腔静脉损伤1例,腹腔镜下缝合;2例术后轻微的乳糜性腹膜后引流液,限制脂肪性饮食,术后1周内乳糜漏消失。9例随访6～36个月,平均21.3月,无复发及远处转移。结论腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫紧靠大血管操作,手术难度及风险较大,须熟练掌握各种腹腔镜操作技术才能减少手术并发症的发生。     

腹腔镜胃癌根治术8例报告

目的：探讨腹腔镜胃癌根治术的可行性。方法2005年2～4月行腹腔镜胃癌根治术8例，其中远端胃根治性切除6例，根治性全胃切除和近端胃根治性切除各1例。结果：8例均在腹腔镜下完成手术，无中转开腹手术。远端胃根治性切除术时间（340±62）min，近端胃根治性切除362min，全胃根治性切除423min。术中出血量：远端胃根治性切除术100～250ml，平均140ml；全胃根治性切除术300ml；近端胃根治性切除170ml，术中均未输血。清扫淋巴结18～37枚，平均23枚。无手术并发症。排气时间38～56h，平均42．4h；进流食时间2～5d，平均2．5d。8例术后随访12～14个月，无复发和转移。结论：早期及较早的进展期胃癌行腹腔镜根治手术是可行的。     

腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术32例报告

自1991年Jcobs用腹腔镜行结肠癌根治术以来。该技术得到不断发展。使腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术（laparoscopie assisted colectomy LAC）成为治疗结肠癌的主要手段之一，但LAC的安全性和疗效一直存在争议。本文总结我院开展LAC的初步经验，旨在探讨LAC的可行性和临床疗效。     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: a single-center experience of 51 cases

A modified technique of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for treatment of renal cell carcinoma makes surgery easier, faster, and safer in terms of tumor cell spillage. We report our experience with this procedure in 51 consecutive cases. A transperitoneal approach was used in all cases. The average patient age was 62 years. The solid renal mass diameter was between 2 and 9 cm. Extrafascial mobilization of the kidney included limited lymph node dissection. In six patients the adrenal gland was removed simultaneously. The specimen was removed intact through a small muscle-splitting incision in the lower abdominal wall. The procedure was successful without conversion to open surgery in all 51 patients. The average operating time was 125 minutes, and the average postoperative hospital stay was 7.2 days. Major complications were seen in 4% of patients. Neither local recurrences nor metastases were observed in the following 7.9 (1-19) months. In our experience, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is safe and efficient. Removing the specimen intact through a small muscle-splitting incision reduces operating time, avoids tumor cell spillage, and allows exact pathological staging.     

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE: After the pioneering period when only few teams were performing the procedure, the laparoscopic approach to radical prostatectomy has become widespread with several technical variations. A comprehensive review of the published literature on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was performed to determine the current state of the art of this surgical innovation in terms of perioperative parameters, functional results and cancer control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: English language, peer reviewed articles published before June 2004 concerning laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were found by MEDLINE query. All articles were analyzed and none were a priori excluded. Conclusions were drawn from series of 50 or more patients. RESULTS: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is being performed at multiple centers worldwide using various surgical approaches and technologies. Analysis of perioperative parameters, including surgical blood loss, operative time, complications and convalescence, demonstrated low morbidity and showed a clear trend toward improvement with increased experience. The reported positive surgical margin rates were lower in more recent series. As measured by prostate specific antigen recurrence and disease-free intervals, oncological results and cancer control rates are difficult to ascertain in the immature series published to date. Functional results in terms of postoperative urinary and sexual function appear encouraging. CONCLUSIONS: Overall the current operative, oncological and functional results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy appear to approximate those of open radical retropubic prostatectomy. These results justify the considerable interest of the urological community in laparoscopy, as evidenced by its widespread application. Nevertheless, longer followup and more mature data are needed definitively to establish laparoscopic radical prostatectomy as an alternative to the retropubic approach.     

腹腔镜技术在前列腺癌根治术中的应用现状及展望

前列腺癌根治术被认为是治疗局限性前列腺癌的金标准,该手术的目标是彻底切除肿瘤,尽快恢复控尿功能和勃起功能.Walsh描述的解剖性耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术(radical retropubic prostatectomy, RRP)是全世界公认的标准外科技术.     

Laparoscopic radical cystectomy

Laparoscopic radical cystectomy is an emerging technique. It has been proposed as an alternative to open radical cystectomy, which is the gold standard treatment of muscleinvasive or high-risk superficial bladder cancer. The experience in laparoscopic radical cystectomy reported in peer-reviewed journals account for approximately 100 cases, with a median longest follow-up of 11.5 months. Safety of the technique and cancer control need to be confirmed by a larger cohort of patients; however, after an initial analysis, it seems to be equivalent to open radical cystectomy. Equivalent does not mean better. Long-term results will determine if supposed benefits of laparoscopy overweigh the true increment of cost and time.     

腹腔镜前列腺癌根治性切除术

Schuessler等于1992年报道了第1例腹腔镜前列腺癌根治性切除术(LRP),1997年他再次报道了9例经腹腔途径LRP,同年Raboy报道了第1例腹膜外途径LRP ,此后至今十余年的时间内,从最初的经腹腔途径,到尝试经腹膜外途径,其技术不断改进 .主要在于提高对肿瘤的治疗效果,保留术后控尿和性功能,提高生活质量,尽量减少并发症、缩短手术时间.目前国外已有多篇1000例以上的LRP报道 ,近期亦有多位作者通过对LRP术后进行随访,结果表明在肿瘤的治疗效果、术后控尿和性功能的保留方面,LRP与开放手术相似,进一步肯定了LRP治疗局限性前列腺癌的价值 .     

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Laparoscopy has become an integral part of urologic surgery. Its indications have been progressively extended to the most advanced oncologic and reconstructive procedures. Within this frame, radical prostatectomy is of major interest, especially considering the incidence and clinical significance of prostate cancer. The procedure comprises several steps of challenging dissection in which the preservation of delicate nerve and muscular structures should be conciliated with safe tumor excision. The intervention ends with vesicourethral anastomosis, which is considered the most difficult reconstructive procedure in urologic laparoscopy. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has gradually become a wholly standardized procedure, and it is now routinely performed in several centers throughout the world.     

Laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy

Because of the high rate of ipsilateral multifocal disease and the low incidence of contralateral disease, upper tract transitional-cell carcinoma has historically been treated with radical nephroureterectomy. This operation has been performed laparoscopically in many medical centers, with various techniques. The difficult concept has always been handling of the distal ureter and bladder cuff. A technique involving transvesical laparoscopy-assisted transurethral dissection with low pressure that mimics the open procedure is used at the Cleveland Clinic. The reported mean operative times range from 2.6 to 8.3 hours, with the longest time being reported from one of the earliest series. Although the cost of laparoscopic nephroureterctomy is higher than that of the open procedure by about 24%, this figure does not include the societal costs of the longer convalescence after the latter operation. Longer follow-up will be required to learn whether the laparoscopic method is as effective from an oncologic standpoint as open surgery.