经腹腔镜脾切除治疗重度以上脾肿大的疗效观察

目的 探讨重度以上脾肿大经腹腔镜脾切除的安全性和有效性.方法 对1995年1月至2011年9月间行脾切除术的患者进行回顾性调查.定义脾上下极长度≥17cm或重量≥600 g为重度脾肿大,脾上下极长度≥22 cm或重量≥1600 g为巨脾.结果 行腹腔镜脾切除术22例,开腹脾切除术21例,其中巨脾患者行腹腔镜脾切除术与开腹脾切除术分别为12例和14例.与开腹脾切除术相比,巨脾患者腹腔镜脾切除术具有术中出血少( 308 ml vs 400 ml,P=0.24),术后住院时间短(3 dvs4.5d,P=0.054)和相似的并发症发生率(17 ％vs 14％),但手术时间较长(195 minvs 105 min,P=0.008),中转开腹率25％.所有行开腹脾切除术患者中再手术2例,1例死亡.结论 重度以上脾肿大经腹腔镜脾切除手术预后优于开腹手术.经腹腔镜脾切除术与手助腹腔镜脾切除预后相当.     

手助腹腔镜巨脾切除术临床分析

目的探讨对巨脾行手助腹腔镜脾切除术(hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy,HALS)的可行性、安全性和手术技巧。方法2005年1月~2006年12月,对门脉高压性巨脾40例,采用HALS(n=15)或开腹脾切除(open splenectomy,OS)(n=25)。2组年龄、性别、肝功能分级、脾脏大小相似。结果2组未发生严重手术并发症。与OS组相比,HALS组术中出血多[(312±61)ml vs(235±105)ml,t=2.583,P=0.014],手术时间长[(95±20)min vs(73±16)min,t=3.832,P=0.000],术后肠功能恢复早[(48±1)h vs(98±1)h,t=-153.093,P=0.000],术后住院时间短[(6±2)d vs(10±2)d,t=-6.124,P=0.000)]。结论手助腹腔镜巨大脾脏切除是安全、可行的。与开腹脾脏切除相比,虽然手术时间长,但是术后恢复快、住院时间短。     

手助腹腔镜与开腹巨脾切除术的临床对比研究

目的对比手助腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗巨脾症的临床疗效。方法 2006年8月～2011年6月,将40例巨脾按患者意愿分成2组各20例,分别进行手助腹腔镜脾切除术(hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy,HALS)和传统开腹脾切除术(open splenectomy,OS),比较两组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、术后并发症发生率及术后住院时间等。结果 20例HALS组手术均获得成功,无中转开腹。与OS组相比,HALS组手术时间长[(110.9±37.2)min vs.(80.2±20.7)min,t=3.225,P=0.003],术中出血量少[(205.2±70.7)ml vs.(390.7±175.1)ml,t=-4.393,P=0.000],术后肛门排气早[(1.8±0.6)d vs.(2.4±0.9)d,t=-2.481,P=0.018],术后住院时间短[(8.9±1.2)d vs.(10.9±1.8)d,t=-4.134,P=0.000],术后并发症发生率差异无显著性[0(0例)vs.5.0%(1例),P=1.000]。结论 相比开腹手术,手助腹腔镜巨脾切除术具有切口美观、创伤小、恢复快的优点,是一种安全可行的治疗巨脾症的手术方式。     

腹腔镜下巨脾切除术24例分析

目的探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除术的临床可行性。方法对24例巨脾伴脾功能亢进或外伤性脾破裂行腹腔镜巨脾切除术患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果 21例患者成功行腹腔镜巨脾切除术,3例患者中转开腹。手术时间为90～390min,平均（170±30）min,术中出血量为50～3500mL,平均（900±50）mL。术后胃肠功能恢复时间为20～72h,2～5d拔除引流管,术后住院5～12d,平均（7±2）d,无手术死亡患者。结论在具备熟练的腔镜和开腹脾外科技术、合适的手术路径、完善的手术器械的条件下,腹腔镜巨脾切除术可以在临床上安全的应用。     

腹腔镜巨脾切除术的临床疗效分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除术的安全性、可行性、手术注意事项及并发症的防治。方法:2008年5月31日至2014年10月9日施行腹腔镜脾切除术77例,以脾脏的长径是否≥20 cm分为巨脾组(n=13)与非巨脾组(n=64)两组,并回顾同期进行的74例开腹巨脾切除术的临床资料,归为开腹组(n=74),对比三组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后恢复进食时间、术后住院时间及术后并发症发生率。结果:与非巨脾组相比,巨脾组手术时间长[(223.0±30.6)min vs.(171.9±14.2)min]、术中出血多[(360.0±57.9)ml vs.(130.8±26.2)ml]、术后住院时间长[(10.1±2.6)d vs.(7.6±0.9)d]。与开腹组相比,巨脾组术后恢复进食时间[(2.7±0.8)d vs.(4.1±0.4)d]及术后住院时间短[(10.1±2.6)d vs.(15.4±2.0)d]。结论:腹腔镜巨脾切除术是安全、可行的,并具有手术切口小、术后康复快、术后住院时间短等优点。     

手助腹腔镜脾切除与开腹脾切除治疗巨脾效果比较

比较手助腹腔镜脾切除与开腹脾切除治疗巨脾的效果。回顾性分析41例因巨脾行脾脏切除术的临床资料。手助腹腔镜脾切除术患者23例,开腹脾切除术患者18例。比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后平均住院时间、术后并发症发生率。结果显示,与开腹脾切除术相比,手助腹腔镜脾切除的手术时间长[(313+41.8)min vs(209+19.9)min,P=0.01]、术中出血量少[(324±54.8)ml vs(539±154.8)mL,P=0.01]、术后并发症少(P=0.004)、术后平均住院时间短[(6±1.2)d vs(9±1.4)d,P=0.01]。结果表明,与开腹脾切除术相比,手助腹腔镜脾切除的手术出血量少,术后并发症发生率低,术后住院时间更短,但手术时间长。     

腹腔镜巨脾切除的适应证与外科疗效分析

目的探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除的适应证与手术疗效。方法对23例腹腔镜巨脾切除病例与53例腹腔镜普通大小脾脏切除及35例开腹巨脾切除病例的手术疗效进行比较。结果本组腹腔镜巨脾切除23例,其中3例同时行腹腔镜巨脾切除伴责门周围血管离断术,9例同时行胆囊切除术,无手术死亡,其中2例中转开腹。巨脾组和普通组相比,手术时间长[（142±29）min vs（92±18）min]和术中出血量多[（540±90）ml vs（210±80）ml]（P均〈0．05）．术后住院时间、腹腔引流置管时间、术后并发症和中转开腹率方面没有差异。巨脾组与开腹组相比,术后腹腔镜引流置管时间[（4．7±0．5）d vs（7．7±0．9）d]和术后住院时间[（5．7＋0．5）d vs（8．4±0．9）d]短,术后并发症少（4.3％vs11.4％）（P均〈0．05）,但术中出血和手术时间差异没有统计学意义。结论腹腔镜巨脾切除术安全可行．近期疗效良好。     

完全腹腔镜下巨脾切除术20例分析

目的探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除术的可行性、安全性及手术技巧。方法回顾性分析2006年8月至2009年7月20例腹腔镜巨脾切除术的临床资料。结果20例均顺利完成腹腔镜巨脾切除术。手术时间100—210min,平均140min。术中出血量20～650ml,平均80ml。术中切除副脾3个,同时行胆囊切除3例,肝活检术9例。全组术后6～12h拔除胃管、尿管并下床活动,12～24h肛门排气,1—2d恢复进食。有1例肝炎后肝硬化患者术后脾窝渗血再次剖腹脾窝止血,无手术死亡。平均住院时间7．8d。结论只要熟练掌握开腹巨脾切除术及腹腔镜技术,腹腔镜巨脾切除术是一种安全可行的微创手术方式,值得临床推广。术中脾周韧带的分离,脾蒂的处理是手术成功的关键因素。     

腹腔镜巨脾切除术29例临床分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除术的安全性及临床疗效.方法 对29例巨脾伴脾功能亢进行腹腔镜脾切除术患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析.结果 28例成功行腹腔镜脾切除术,1例中转开腹.手术时间为100～210min,平均(160±30)min;术中出血量为50～1200ml,平均(150±50)ml;术后住院4～9d,平均(6±2)d.术后并发脾热2例.结论 随着腹腔镜器械的改进和操作技巧的熟练,腹腔镜巨脾切除术是安全可行且疗效确切的.     

腹腔镜巨脾切除术12例临床分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除术的安全性及临床效果。方法:回顾分析12例腹腔镜巨脾切除术的临床资料。结果:12例中1例中转开腹,11例成功完成腹腔镜巨脾切除术,手术时间150~200m in(平均160m in),术中失血20~200m l(平均120m l),术后胃肠蠕动恢复时间12~24h,术后平均住院5.5d,无手术死亡病例,发生并发症3例,1例术后皮下气肿,1例术中降结肠损伤,1例术后门静脉血栓形成。结论:腹腔镜巨脾切除术安全可行,但必须具有良好的腹腔镜技术和开腹脾切除经验。     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy versus open splenectomy for massive splenomegaly: 20-year experience at a Canadian centre

Background

Multiple techniques for splenectomy are now employed and include open, laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy (HALS). Concerns regarding a purely laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly (> 20 cm) arise from potentially longer operative times, higher conversion rates and increased blood loss. The HALS technique offers the potential advantages of laparoscopy, with the added safety of having the surgeon’s hand in the abdomen during the operation. In this study, we compared the HALS technique to standard open splenectomy for the management of massive splenomegaly.

Methods

We reviewed all splenectomies performed at 5 hospitals in the greater Vancouver area between 1988 and 2007 for multiple demographic and outcome measures. Open splenectomies were compared with HALS procedures for spleens larger than 20 cm. Splenectomy reports without data on spleen size were excluded from the analysis. We performed Student t tests and Pearson χ² statistical analyses.

Results

A total of 217 splenectomies were analyzed. Of these, 39 splenectomies were performed for spleens larger than 20 cm. We compared the open splenectomy group (19 patients) with the HALS group (20 patients). There was a 5% conversion rate in the HALS group. Estimated blood loss (375 mL v. 935 mL, p = 0.08) and the mean (and standard deviation [SD]) transfusion rates (0.0 [SD 0.0] units v. 0.8 [SD 1.7] units, p = 0.06) were lower in the HALS group. Length of stay in hospital was significantly shorter in the HALS group (4.2 v. 8.9 d, p = 0.001). Complication rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy is a safe and effective technique for the management of spleens larger than 20 cm. The technique results in shorter hospital stays, and it is a good alternative to open splenectomy when treating patients with massive splenomegaly.     

经X-CONE单孔与传统腹腔镜脾切除术的对比研究

目的 比较经 X-CONE 单孔腹腔镜和传统多孔腹腔镜行脾切除的安全性及可行性.方法 分析 2012 年 4 月至 2013 年 9 月经 X-CONE 单孔腹腔镜脾切除 12 例（ A 组）,应用传统多孔腹腔镜脾切除 19 例（ B 组）.比较两组病例的手术时间、标本取出时间、术中出血量、术后镇痛指数 （ VAPS ）、术后肛门排气时间、术后引流时间、术后住院时间、术后并发症、住院费用、美容效果评分等,并对结果进行分析.结果 两组患者均成功完成手术,A 组无中转为传统腹腔镜和开腹手术病例,两组均无明显手术并发症.两组病例比较在术中出血量、术后镇痛指数（ VAPS ）、术后肛门排气时间、术后引流时间、术后住院时间、住院费用等方面无统计学差异.A 组病例手术时间（ 168.4 ± 67.7 ） min 明显长于 B 组手术时间（ 105.4 ± 21.7 ） min,差异有统计学意义（ t = 2.57,P ＜ 0.05 ）.而两组病例标本取出时间,A组（ 4.1 ± 1.1 ） min少于 B 组（ 9.9 ± 3.0 ） min,差异有统计学意义（ t = -4.91,P ＜ 0.01 ）.术后美容效果评分 A 组（ 7.9 ± 1.1 ）分优于 B 组（ 6.4 ± 1.0 ）分,差异有统计学意义（ t = 3.89,P ＜ 0.01 ）.结论经 X-CONE 单孔腹腔镜行脾切除的安全性和可行性与传统多孔腹腔镜相当,美容效果突出,为患者提供了另一个微创技术的选择.     

手助腹腔镜与开腹巨脾切除术对机体应激反应的影响

目的:总结手助腹腔镜与开腹巨脾切除术对患者术后机体应激反应的影响。方法:随机选取2006年8月至2011年10月40例巨脾患者,根据其经济状况及意愿分为两组,每组20例,分别行手助腹腔镜脾切除术(hand-assisted laparo-scopic splenectomy,HALS)及传统开腹脾切除术(open splenectomy,OS),对比分析两组患者术前、术后皮质醇(cortisol,COR)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(tumor necrosis factor-α,TNF-α)、白细胞介素-6(interleukin-6,IL-6)、C-反应蛋白(C-reactive protein,CRP)水平。结果:术后1天HALS组COR、TNF-α、IL-6、CRP水平均低于OS组(P<0.05),术后3天TNF-α、CRP水平低于OS组(P<0.05),术后5天CRP低于OS组(P<0.01)。结论:相对开腹手术而言,手助腹腔镜巨脾切除术对患者术后机体应激反应的影响较小,充分显示了其微创的优越性。     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy vs conventional laparoscopic splenectomy in cases of splenomegaly

HYPOTHESIS: Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) is the procedure of choice for elective splenectomy. Splenomegaly may preclude safe mobilization and hilar control using conventional laparoscopic techniques. Hand-assisted LS (HALS) may offer the same benefits of minimally invasive surgery for splenomegaly while allowing safe manipulation and splenic dissection. DESIGN: A retrospective review of patients with splenomegaly undergoing conventional LS or HALS was performed. SETTING: Tertiary care referral center. PATIENTS: Hand-assisted LS was performed at the start of the operation for patients with splenomegaly; splenomegaly was determined by palpation of the splenic tip extending to the midline or the iliac crest, or by a craniocaudal splenic length of greater than 22 cm. Splenomegaly was defined as a splenic weight of greater than 700 g after morcellation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient demographic characteristics, operative indications, splenic weight after morcellation, morbidity, mortality, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with splenomegaly were identified: 31 underwent standard LS and 14 underwent HALS. The HALS group had significantly larger spleens than the conventional LS group (mean weight, 1516 vs 1031 g; P =.02). Mean operative time (177 vs 186 minutes; P =.89), estimated blood loss (602 vs 376 mL; P =.17), and length of hospital stay (5.4 vs 4.2 days; P =.24) and complication rates (5 [36%] of 14 vs 5 [16%] of 31; P =.70) were similar between the HALS and the standard LS groups. No perioperative mortality occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Hand-assisted LS is a safe and efficacious procedure for these extremely difficult cases. Hand-assisted LS provides the benefits of a minimally invasive approach in cases of splenomegaly.     

脾破裂手助腹腔镜切除术的应用

目的:探讨手助腹腔镜技术在脾破裂切除术中的应用。方法:用手助腹腔镜技术为15例外伤性脾破裂患者行脾切除术。结果:14例顺利完成手术,1例术中大出血中转开腹,平均手术时间105min,术中平均失血110ml,平均住院6.5d。结论:手助腹腔镜技术治疗外伤性脾破裂是安全可行的,适用于无脑、胸损伤,血液动力学稳定的患者。     

我国手助腹腔镜与开腹脾切除术临床疗效比较的系统评价

目的:用系统评价的方法比较手助腹腔镜脾切除术与开腹脾切除术的临床效果.方法:收集1991年-2012年国内公开发表的有关比较手助腹腔镜脾切除术与开腹脾切除术的临床对照研究,筛选出符合条件的研究进行Meta分析.结果:经筛选后纳入符合标准的文献8篇,共419例患者,其中手助腹腔镜脾切除202例(手助组),开腹脾切除217例(开腹组).Meta分析结果显示手助组的手术时间较开腹组长,而术中出血量、胃肠功能恢复时间、住院时间均小于开腹组(均P＜0.05).结论:手助腹腔镜脾切除术具有术中出血量少、术后胃肠功能恢复快、住院时间短等优点.然而因该系统评价纳入研究多为非随机对照试验,研究中存在偏倚因素并可能会对最终结论造成影响,因此上述结论尚需谨慎对待,仍需进一步开展多中心、大样本随机对照试验来验证.     

脾大部切除及食管横断吻合术治疗肝硬化门静脉高压症的血流动力学研究

目的 评价脾大部切除、残脾腹膜后包埋及食管横断吻合术对肝硬化门静脉高压症患者门静脉血流动力学的影响.方法 将40例门静脉高压症患者随机分为研究组和对照组,每组20例.均进行食管横断吻合术,对照组做全脾切除,研究组保留部分带血管蒂脾脏移植于腹膜后.手术前后用三维动态增强磁共振血管成像测量门静脉主干的管腔横截面面积、血流量、血流速度和流向;观察自体移植脾在腹膜后的血供及侧支循环.结果 两组术前均存在胃底食管曲张静脉,术后6个月MRA复查均消失或改善.术后6个月两组门静脉主干的管腔横截面积明显减少[研究组(1.81±0.73)cm~2比(1.20±0.52)cm~2,P＜0.01;对照组(1.78±0.52)cm~2比(1.30±0.12)cm~2,P＜0.01];术后两组门静脉主干的平均流速均下降[研究组(9.86±0.10)cm/s比(7.06±1.92)cm/s,P＜0.01;对照组(10.0±0.6)cm/s比(8.2±2.4)cm/s,P＜0.01],且研究组少于对照组(P＜0.01);术后两组门静脉主干的平均流量均下降[研究组(15.0±1.9)ml/s比(10.5±2.7)ml/s,P＜0.01;对照组(14.9±2.1)mI/s比(11.6±2.1)ml/s,P＜0.01],且研究组少于对照组(P＜0.05).移植脾在腹膜后成活,并建立了广泛的侧支循环.结论 脾大部切除、带血管蒂残脾腹膜后移植及食管横断吻合术治疗肝硬化门静脉高压症不仅保留了脾脏的功能,而且具有断流和分流为一体的联合性术式的作用.     

腹腔镜脾切除术44例临床分析

目的：总结腹腔镜脾切除术的经验体会。方法：2006年9月至2009年10月行腹腔镜脾切除术44例,其中外伤性脾破裂出血6例,特发性血小板减少性紫癜3例,自身免疫性溶血性贫血1例,脾囊肿4例,脾血管瘤2例,脾淋巴管瘤1例,脾错构瘤2例,肝硬化门脉高压脾功能亢进25例。均采用二级脾蒂离断法。结果：43例成功完成腹腔镜手术,1例行开腹手术。手术时间55~240min,平均（126.40±52.43）min,术中出血30~1 000ml,平均（221.7±214.43）ml,术后住院5~15d,平均6.5d,1例脾错构瘤由于术后短时间引流量多,引流液色红而再次行腹腔镜探查,发现为取脾时意外撕裂大网膜导致出血,腹腔镜下成功止血。术后无死亡病例。结论：腹腔镜二级脾蒂离断法脾切除术安全、可行、微创、经济。     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy for splenic tumors

BACKGROUND: The feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy (HALS) for splenic tumors including benign or malignant neoplasms and the associated clinical outcome of the patients remain unclear. METHODS: A total of 10 patients with splenic tumors undergoing HALS were retrospectively analyzed in this study. The intraoperative course, postoperative course, and postoperative recovery were evaluated. RESULTS: Ten patients with splenic tumors consisted of 5 with benign tumors and 5 with malignant tumors. HALS was not converted to an open splenectomy in any of the patients. Mean operative time was 170 min (range 100-310 min). Mean estimated blood loss was 105 g (range 10-900 g). Mean splenic size and splenic weight was 13 cm and 478 g, respectively. Splenomegaly based on size or weight occurred in 50% of the patients. There were no intra- or postoperative complications. Postoperative chemotherapy was given to 4 patients with malignant tumors including metastatic carcinomas and malignant lymphomas. All the patients were alive at a mean follow-up of 26 months, ranging from 15 to 43 months after surgery. There was no port-site recurrence after surgery in our study. Mean time to first flatus, mean time to first walking, mean time to resumption of oral intake, mean length of hospital stay, and mean duration of epidural analgesia were 1.8, 1, 1.5, 10.8 and 3.1 days, respectively. The results were equal in terms of intra- and postoperative course to those seen with a standard laparoscopic splenectomy for 13 patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura. CONCLUSION: HALS may be a good indication for malignant tumors as well as benign tumors of the spleen.     

Laparoscopic splenectomy

We describe the clinical course of 23 patients considered for laparoscopic splenectomy. One patient was excluded on the basis of preoperative angiography findings, and two (9%) were converted to open surgery. In the remaining 20 patients who successfully underwent laparoscopic splenectomy, no mortality was reported; four postoperative complications (20% morbidity) occurred. Mean operating time was 3 h 35 min (135–300 min). After a mean postoperative stay of 3.9 days (2–9 days), all patients except two were back to normal activities within 2 weeks of hospital discharge. Preoperative splenic artery embolization, begun with the third patient, helped to reduce operative blood loss and made the procedure easier to perform. Laparoscopic splenectomy has become our procedure of choice for elective removal of normalsized (<11 cm long) or moderately enlarged (11–20 cm long) spleens.Presented at the annual meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), Nashville, Tennessee, USA, 18–19 April 1994