内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗老年患者贲门早期癌的疗效分析

目的探讨内镜黏膜下剥离术（endoscopic submucosal dissection，ESD）治疗老年患者贲门早期癌的安全性和有效性。方法回顾性分析南京鼓楼医院2011年1月—2018年6月行贲门早期癌ESD治疗的患者499例，按年龄是否超过65周岁分为中青年组和老年组，对比两组患者基线资料、病变特征、术后并发症、短期疗效和长期疗效等。结果中青年组包括227例患者（229个病灶），老年组中包括272例患者（283个病灶）。两组比较，除年龄（P<0.001）和体重指数(P=0.002)外，其他基线资料、病变病理特征差异均无统计学意义。老年组患者治愈性切除的比例为77.0%，低于中青年组的84.3%（P=0.045），而整块切除率(100.0%比99.6%，P=1.000)、完全切除率（94.7%比93.9%，P=0.705）、术后并发症发生率（6.4%比5.7%，P=0.747）、手术时长[(64.02±39.24)min比(66.16±44.62)min，P=0.566]和住院时长[(6.76±2.06)d比(6.47±1.74)d，P=0.092]差异均无统计学意义。中位随访47.9个月，随访者中，老年组有13.4%的患者追加了外科手术，略低于中青年组（14.1%，P=0.891），术后复发、淋巴结转移、远处转移、总体死亡率、疾病相关死亡率组间差异均无统计学意义。通过生存分析发现，老年组五年总体生存率为94.41%，五年疾病特异性生存率为99.18%，和中青年组的96.34%（P=0.156）、99.03%（P=0.858）相比，差异均无统计学意义。结论ESD治疗老年患者贲门早期癌是安全的，且可获得较好的短期和长期疗效。     

钛夹联合尼龙绳牵引辅助技术在内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗早期胃角癌中的临床研究

目的 评估钛夹联合尼龙绳牵引辅助下内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）治疗早期胃角癌及癌前病变的应用价值及安全性。方法 以2018年1—12月在杭州市第一人民医院行ESD治疗的59例早期胃角癌及癌前病变患者为研究对象,采用随机数字表法随机分入常规ESD组（对照组,n=28）和钛夹联合尼龙绳牵引组（试验组,n=31）。比较两组患者的黏膜下补充注射次数、ESD手术时间、病灶面积、黏膜剥离时间、单位时间切除率、病灶完整切除率以及手术并发症等情况。结果 试验组黏膜下补充注射次数少于对照组[（2.3±1.1）次比（3.7±1.4）次,t=4.557,P＜0.001];试验组的病灶面积和对照组相比差异无统计学意义 [（12.7±2.6）cm2比（11.7±2.7）cm2,t=1.485,P=0.143];试验组ESD手术时间[（72.4±24.7）min比（93.6±28.9）min,t=3.043,P=0.004]和黏膜剥离时间[（67.7±23.3）min比（88.2±28.3）min,t=3.054,P=0.003]短于对照组,单位时间切除率高于对照组[（20.2±3.2）mm2/min比（14.3±3.4）mm2/min,t=6.879,P＜0.001]。两组患者的一次性完整切除率均为100.0%。两组患者均未出现穿孔及术后出血等,试验组术中出血率低于对照组[19.4%（6/31）比35.7%（10/28）, χ2=1.992,P=0.158]。结论 使用钛夹联合尼龙绳牵引辅助技术可降低胃角ESD的技术难度、缩短操作时间、降低术中出血可能,具有较好的应用价值。     

不同直径结直肠早癌及癌前病变行内镜黏膜下剥离术的对比分析

目的 探讨分析内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)治疗不同直径结直肠肿瘤的差异性。 方法 收集2012年10月至2015年12月中国人民解放军总医院第七医学中心消化内镜中心210处结直肠ESD治疗的临床资料进行回顾性分析,将病灶按直径分为两组(直径≥4.0cm组和直径<4.0cm组),进行相关因素的对比分析。结果 210处结直肠ESD平均手术时间为（50.3±42.7）分钟,病灶平均大小为（7.98 ±10.84cm₂）;整块切除率91.4%,完整切除率90.5%,治愈性切除率88.6%。穿孔发生率5.2%,迟发性出血率0.5%。与直径< 4.0 cm 的肿瘤相比,切除直径≥ 4.0 cm 的肿瘤所需时间更长(79.63±53.91 min比35.28±24.99 min;P<0.001);病变主要位于直肠(61.97%);LST息肉以结节混合型为主(54.93%);整块切除率、完整切除率和治愈性切除率均低于切除直径< 4.0 cm 的肿瘤,其中完整切除率差异有统计学意义(85.92% vs. 94.24%; P=0.041)。直径≥4.0cm组穿孔率增高(7.04%),但两组穿孔率的差异没有统计学意义。结论 ESD切除直径≥ 4.0 cm的结直肠肿瘤,所需时间明显增加,手术风险更高。对于非直肠的病变要更加小心处理。     

十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤内镜下切除的回顾性研究

目的 评价内镜超声检查术（EUS）判断十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤大小和浸润深度的准确性，并对比内镜黏膜下剥离术（ESD）和改良ESD治疗十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤的有效性和安全性。方法 以2007年1月至2018年1月于中国人民解放军总医院接受ESD（ESD组）或改良ESD（改良ESD组）治疗的22例十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤患者为研究对象，回顾性纳入患者临床资料。22例患者中，13例行ESD,9例行改良ESD。对比分析ESD组和改良ESD组整块切除率、R0切除率、手术时间、手术相关并发症发生率等指标。以术后病理结果为金标准，评估术前EUS判定病变大小和浸润深度的准确率。结果 22例十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤大小为（6.9±1.5）mm。与术后组织病理学结果相对照，内镜超声评估病变浸润深度的准确性为95.5%（21/22）。ESD组和改良ESD组的R0切除率分别为13/13和7/9（100.0% 比77.8%, P=1.000）。改良ESD组在手术时间上显著短于ESD组[（16.0±2.2） min 比 （29.8±4.9）min，P<0.001]。ESD组发生1例术中穿孔和1例迟发穿孔，改良ESD组发生1例迟发出血。术后22例患者均成功进行了随访，随访时间为(30.0±24.8)个月。随访期间无患者发生局部复发或者远处转移。结论 内镜超声可以准确评价十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤的大小和浸润深度。对于直径≤10 mm，浸润深度局限在黏膜下层的十二指肠非壶腹部神经内分泌肿瘤，改良ESD可以获得与ESD相当的临床治疗效果。     

改良多隧道法内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗长度大于8 cm食管全周浅表癌的临床研究

目的　探讨改良多隧道法内镜黏膜下剥离术（endoscopic submucosal multi?tunnel dissection,ESMTD）治疗轴向长度>8 cm食管全周浅表癌的有效性和安全性。方法　回顾性分析南京医科大学第一附属医院2018年1月—2021年12月治疗的79例病变长度>8 cm的食管全周浅表癌患者资料。根据治疗方法将患者分为改良ESMTD组（32例）和外科手术组（47例）,对比分析两组的整块切除率、完全切除率、手术时间、住院时间、医疗费用及手术相关并发症等指标。结果　改良ESMTD组和外科手术组的整块切除率均为100.0%（χ2=0.000,P=1.000）,完全切除率分别为96.9%（31/32）和97.9%（46/47）（χ2=0.000,P=1.000）;改良ESMTD组手术时间短于外科手术组［（150.5±17.2）min比（185.8±15.2）min,t=9.527,P<0.001］,术后发生迟发性出血［3.1%（1/32）比10.6%（5/47）,χ2=0.648,P=0.421］、迟发性穿孔［3.1%（1/32）比4.3%（2/47）,χ2=0.000,P=1.000］发生率与外科手术组差异无统计学意义,术后C反应蛋白［（64.3±6.9）mg/L比（89.2±7.4）mg/L,t=15.634,P<0.001］、中性粒细胞水平［（10.1±1.4）×109/L比（13.1±1.2）×109/L,t=15.083,P<0.001］低于外科手术组。改良ESMTD组住院时间短于外科手术组［（9.2±1.2）d比（11.5±1.2）d,t=8.363,P<0.001］,医疗费用少于外科手术组［（3.2±0.3）万元比（5.9±0.6）万元,t=26.384,P<0.001］。结论　与传统外科手术相比,改良ESMTD治疗轴向长度>8 cm的全周食管浅表癌疗效确切,安全性好,且住院时间短,医疗费用少,保留了食管的完整性,提高了患者术后生活质量,具有较良好的临床应用价值。     

长节段早期食管癌及癌前病变内镜治疗的有效性及安全性评价

目的 分析病灶长度超过5 cm的早期食管癌及癌前病变行内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)与内镜分片黏膜切除术(EPMR)的疗效及安全性。方法 回顾性分析2012年1月至2017 年7月在福建省食管癌早诊早治促进联盟治疗的85例病灶长度超过5 cm的早期食管癌及癌前病变患者临床资料。根据术式不同,分为ESD组（52例）及EPMR组（33例）,对比两组疗效、并发症及随访情况。结果 ESD组与EPMR组的完整切除率相比差异无统计学意义[86.5%（45/52）比87.9%（29/33）,P>0.05],ESD组的手术时间[（58.53±30.50）min比（32.06±9.12）min]、术后禁食时间[（4.18±1.30）d比（3.67±0.96）d]、住院时间[（7.45±2.44）d比（6.54±1.73）d]及抗生素使用时间[（3.48±2.33）d比（1.96±2.20）d]明显长于EPMR组（P均<0.05）。ESD组与EPMR组的术中并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;发热、胸痛、术后出血等近期术后并发症发生率对比差异亦无统计学意义（P>0.05）。ESD组术后狭窄发生率较EPMR组高[23.1%（12/52）比6.1%（2/33）,P<0.05]。术后随访3~63个月,ESD组复发5例,EPMR组1例,两者对比差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 EPMR与ESD治疗病灶长度超过5 cm的早期食管癌及癌前病变具有相同的有效性及安全性,而EPMR操作时间短,术后狭窄并发症少,且术式相对简单,易于掌握。     

牙线牵引辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗胃角黏膜病变的疗效（含视频）

目的 探讨牙线牵引辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术（endoscopic submucosal dissection, ESD）治疗胃角黏膜病变的疗效。方法 回顾性分析2015年1月—2018年12月厦门大学附属第一医院内镜中心收治的127例胃角黏膜病变患者病例资料。根据术中手术方法,将患者分为牙线牵引辅助ESD组（牵引组,n=51）和传统ESD组（传统组,n=76）,同时把41例胃角纤维化病例也分为牵引组(n=23)和传统组(n=18)。对比分析手术时间、整块切除率、治愈性切除率及出血、肌层损伤、穿孔等不良事件发生率等指标。结果 牵引组与传统组病例年龄、性别、病变大小及病变形态差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。牵引组手术时间较传统组明显缩短[（65.4±36.5） min比(103.5±43.2) min,P=0.012],病变整块切除率[100.00%(51/51)比90.79%(69/76),P=0.026]及治愈性切除率均更高[94.12%(48/51)比81.58%(62/76),P=0.042],且剥离过程中肌层损伤[5.88%(3/51)比25.00%（19/76）,P=0.010]及术中出血更少[47.06%（24/51）比82.89%（63/76）,P=0.010]。传统组2例(2.63%)纤维化病例穿孔,牵引组无穿孔病例,穿孔发生率差异无统计学意义（P=0.243）。在胃角纤维化病例中,牵引组手术时间较传统组明显缩短[（81.4±29.3） min比(119.3±37.6） min,P=0.010],病变整块切除率[100.00%（23/23）比72.22%(13/18）,P=0.007]及治愈性切除率均更高[95.65%(22/23)比72.22%(13/18),P=0.035],且剥离过程中肌层损伤[8.70%(2/23)比72.22%(13/18）,P=0.001]及术中出血更少[78.26%(18/23)比100.00%(18/18),P=0.035]。结论 牙线牵引辅助ESD治疗胃角黏膜病变及有纤维化的胃角病变安全有效,与传统ESD相比,手术时间更短,治愈率更高,不良事件发生率更低。     

两种黏膜切开刀在食管病变内镜黏膜下剥离术中的有效性及安全性比较

目的比较单极内镜黏膜下剥离术(endoscopic submucosal dissection,ESD)电刀（简称T刀）与Dual刀在ESD治疗食管病变中的有效性及安全性。方法纳入2018年6月—2019年1月期间就诊于苏州大学附属第一医院、诊断为食管病变且行ESD治疗的59例患者,采用随机数字表法分为Dual刀组（30例）及T刀组（29例）。比较两组操作时间、切除速度、完全切除率以及并发症发生率等情况。结果T刀组与Dual刀组患者在性别、年龄、合并症等方面差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。T刀组、Dual刀组的手术时间分别为（57.86±24.62）min和（66.28±29.48）min,差异有统计学意义（t=1.189,P=0.024）;切除速度分别为（22.80±7.31）mm2/min和（16.20±7.24）mm2/min,差异有统计学意义（t=3.484,P=0.001）;病灶完全切除率分别为86.2%（25/29）和86.7%（26/30）,差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.108,P=0.742）。T刀组出现并发症2例（6.9%）,Dual刀组并发症共5例（16.7%）,两组并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.574,P=0.449）。两组均未见术后穿孔、出血情况。结论在食管病变ESD中,T刀相较于Dual刀能缩短手术时间,提高切除速度,安全性、有效性具有一定优势。     

内镜黏膜下挖除术与全层切除术治疗腔内生长胃间质瘤的疗效及安全性比较

目的比较内镜黏膜下挖除术（endoscopic submucosal excavation,ESE）和内镜全层切除术（endoscopic full-thickness resection,EFR）治疗腔内生长胃间质瘤的疗效及安全性。方法回顾性分析2009年6月—2020年6月在南京鼓楼医院确诊为胃间质瘤的441例患者资料,其中241例行ESE（ESE组）,200例行EFR（EFR组）。比较两组患者的基础数据（性别、年龄、体重指数）,肿瘤大小,手术相关参数,并发症,住院时间,费用和随访情况。结果两组患者在性别、年龄、体重指数、肿瘤大小、美国国立卫生研究院危险度分级、完整切除率、整块切除率等方面差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与EFR组比较,ESE组手术所需关闭胃壁缺损的钛夹数量更少[6.0（4.0,6.0）个比6.0（5.0,8.0）个,U=18 424.0,P<0.001],术后首次流食时间[2.0（1.0,2.0） d比2.0（2.0,3.0）d,U=17 420.0,P<0.001]与住院时间[6.0（5.0,8.0） d比7.0（6.0,9.0） d,U=18 906.0,P<0.001]更短,总费用更低[1.89（1.64,2.14）万元比2.09（1.81,2.38）万元,U=17 956.0,P<0.001],且并发症总发生率低于EFR组[5.8%(14/241)比11.5%(23/200),χ2=4.605,P=0.032]。441例患者均接受随访,中位随访时间45.0个月,疾病复发率为0.45%（2/441）,无疾病相关死亡病例。结论ESE和EFR治疗腔内生长胃间质瘤的疗效相当,但ESE并发症发生率较低,并可缩短住院时间,降低费用负担。     

潜水胶囊内镜的临床初步应用

目的 比较传统胶囊内镜与潜水胶囊内镜的肠道准备质量及病变检出情况。方法 回顾性分析2016年3月至2017年3月在我院接受胶囊内镜检查的连续60例患者胶囊内镜检查资料，前30例患者采用常规方法进行肠道准备（传统胶囊内镜组），后30例患者采用潜水法进行肠道准备（潜水胶囊内镜组），比较肠道准备评分、胶囊内镜平均胃通过时间（GTT）、小肠通过时间（SBTT）、胶囊内镜检查完成率以及阳性病变检出率等。结果 传统胶囊内镜组患者肠道准备评分平均为2.56±0.71分，显著低于潜水胶囊内镜组3.24±0.71分（t=3.768，p<0.001）。传统胶囊内镜组平均GTT 40.86±35.91min、SBTT 314.20±151.30min、结肠到达率100%；潜水胶囊内镜组患者平均GTT 52.82±38.96min、SBTT 282.44±123.23min、结肠到达率90%，组间差异无统计学意义（p=0.233、0.392、0.237）。传统胶囊内镜组患者中阳性病变检出率为73.3% (22/30)，潜水胶囊内镜组阳性病变检出率为80% (24/30)，两组数据无显著差异（χ２=0.373，p=0.542）。结论 潜水胶囊内镜较传统胶囊内镜肠道准备质量显著提高，且有提高病变阳性检出率的趋势。     

Abdominoperineal resection for recurrent cancer following anterior resection

Cases are reviewed of 12 patients who had abdominoperineal resections for cancer recurrence subsequent to anterior resection. Although this procedure is technically more difficult, we experienced no mortality or significant morbidity, and the postoperative hospital stay was similar to that of patients who received an abdominoperineal resection as a primary procedure. Although we have no long-term cures, at least significant palliation can be achieved in selected patients who have no evidence of distant metastases Read at the meeting of the American Society of Colon Rectal Surgeons, Hollywood, Florida, May 11 to 16, 1980. This paper received the Ohio Valley Proctologic Society Award.     

Sleeve resection

Between 1972 and 1982, 43 patients underwent sleeve resection for different types of bronchial tumors. A 5-year survival could be calculated for 23 patients (48%), which is in the range of simple lobectomy. In the patients with lymph-gland involvement, the 5-year survival was 40%, in those not radically resected, it was 25%. All of the latter received irradiation after resection. All patients who died 5 or more years after the first operation had second primary bronchial carcinoma. In 27 patients we were able to compare lung function before and after the operation. Only in 3 patients lung function tests after resection were worse than expected, due to greater asthmatic bronchial obstruction. Ventilation-perfusion scanning was also performed in 22 patients. Only 3 scans showed diminished perfusion, probably as a result of postoperative irradiation.     

Radiofrequency ablation-assisted liver resection a step toward bloodless liver resection

BACKGROUND: Liver resection is currently the most efficient curative approach for a wide variety of liver tumors. The application of modern techniques and new surgical devices has improved operative outcomes. Radiofrequency ablation is used more often for liver parenchymal transection. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation-assisted liver resection.METHODS: A retrospective study of 145 consecutive patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation-assisted liver resection was performed. Intraoperative blood loss, need for transfusion or intraoperative Pringle maneuver, the duration of liver parenchymal transection, perioperative complications, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were all evaluated.RESULTS: Fifty minor and ninety-five major liver resections were performed. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 251 m L, with a transfusion rate of 11.7%. The Pringle maneuver was necessary in 12 patients(8.3%). The mean duration for parenchymal transection was 51.75 minutes. There were 47 patients(32.4%) with postoperative complications. There is no mortality within 30 days after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency ablation-assisted liver resection permits both major and minor liver resections with minimal blood loss and without occlusion of hepatic inflow. Furthermore it decreases the need for blood transfusion and reduces morbidity and mortality.     

Aggressive liver resection including major-vessel resection for colorectal liver metastases

AIM: To clarify short- and long-term outcomes of combined resection of liver with major vessels in treating colorectal liver metastases.METHODS: Clinicopathologic data were evaluated for 312 patients who underwent 371 liver resections for metastases from colorectal cancer. Twenty-five patients who underwent resection and reconstruction of retrohepatic vena cava, major hepatic veins, or hepatic venous confluence during hepatectomies were compared with other patients, who underwent conventional liver resections.RESULTS: Morbidity was 20% (75/371) and mortality was 0.3% (1/312) in all patients after hepatectomy. Hepatic resection combined with major-vessel resection/reconstruction could be performed with acceptable morbidity (16%) and no mortality. By multivariate analysis, repeat liver resection (relative risk or RR, 5.690; P = 0.0008) was independently associated with resection/reconstruction of major vessels during hepatectomy, as were tumor size exceeding 30 mm (RR, 3.338; P = 0.0292) and prehepatectomy chemotherapy (RR, 3.485; P = 0.0083). When 312 patients who underwent a first liver resection for initial liver metastases were divided into those with conventional resection (n = 296) and those with combined resection of liver and major vessels (n = 16), overall survival and disease-free rates were significantly poorer in the combined resection group than in the conventional resection group (P = 0.02 and P < 0.01, respectively). A similar tendency concerning overall survival was observed for conventional resection (n = 37) vs major-vessel resection combined with liver resection (n = 7) performed as a second resection following liver recurrences (P = 0.09). Combined major-vessel resection at first hepatectomy (not performed; 0.512; P = 0.0394) and histologic major-vessel invasion at a second hepatectomy (negative; 0.057; P = 0.0005) were identified as independent factors affecting survival by multivariate analysis.CONCLUSION: Hepatic resection including major-vessel resection/reconstruction for colorectal liver metastases can be performed with acceptable operative risk. However, such aggressive approaches are beneficial mainly in patients responding to effective prehepatectomy chemotherapy.     

Endoscopic mucosal resection

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a promising therapeutic option for removal of superficial carcinomas or premalignant lesions throughout the gastrointestinal tract. This review discusses indications and the several techniques of EMR in early tumors of esophagus, stomach, duodenum, and colon. EMR is not yet widely utilized in the West. However, great benefits may be obtained from this non-invasive technique after an accurate evaluation of patients and a careful staging of lesions that may assess the depth of infiltration and exclude the presence of lymph node metastases. EMR permits a complete removal of the lesion with histologic assessment of the entire specimen and the change in the pathologic stage in a significant number of patients. To minimize the risk of serious complications (mostly bleeding and perforation), only experienced endoscopists should undertake EMR in an appropriate environment. Data from literature are encouraging on the use of EMR, but a long-term follow-up of a large number of patients is necessary to confirm the effectiveness of this therapy.