腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除Studer回肠新膀胱术

目的 介绍腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除Studer回肠新膀胱术的方法.方法 膀胱癌患者8例.均为男性,年龄51～69岁,平均57岁.浸润性膀胱癌7例,腺癌1例.临床分期:T27例,T21例.经腹取5个穿刺点,腹腔镜下清扫双侧闭孔、髂内及髂外淋巴结;游离膀胱腹侧,剪开双侧盆筋膜,缝扎阴茎背静脉复合体;游离输精管和精囊,剪开狄氏筋膜,分离前列腺与直肠间隙;分离前列腺尖部尿道,切断尿道,将切下的膀胱和前列腺装入标本袋.下腹正中切口6～8 cm,取出标本,于该切口外距回盲部20 cm处截取45 cm回肠.取远端40 cm段对折,纵行切开对系膜缘肠壁,交叉折叠缝制新膀胱,将双侧输尿管吻合于新膀胱近端未剖开的5 cm肠管上.新膀胱颈部与保留尿道断端间断缝合.结果 8例手术顺利,手术时间 6～8 h,平均7.2 h;出血量200～800 ml,平均420 ml;无中转开放手术者.术后病理分期pT2 6例、pT31例、pT2N2M01例,切缘均为阴性.术后发生右侧输尿管套叠1例,经输尿管镜下还纳松解.8例随访3～12个月,生活质量良好.结论 腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除术切11小、出血少,技术可行,Stueder原位膀胱技术简单、输入袢长、术后功能好.     

腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除术

根治性膀胱全切除并可控性尿流改道或原位新膀胱手术困难而复杂。在腹腔镜下施行这种手术在 10年前几乎是一种梦想 ,但是近年来腹腔镜下外科手术在泌尿外科领域的应用进展非常迅速 ,使之逐渐变为现实。腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术在国外少数大的医疗中心已积累了数百例经验[1] ,国内少数单位也在尝试这种术式。而腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除因涉及尿流改道困难较大 ,迄今为此国外仅有零星报道 ,国内未见报道。在病例数最多的报道中也只有 10例病人 ,而且大部分在切除膀胱后需中转开腹做尿流改道 ,因而认为腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除并无实际的优越性 ,…     

比较腹腔镜与开放根治性膀胱切除术治疗膀胱癌的效果

目的分析比较腹腔镜与开放根治性膀胱切除术治疗膀胱癌的效果。方法选取信阳市中心医院2016-03—2018-05间行根治性膀胱切除术的88例膀胱癌患者。观察组46例采用腹腔镜手术,对照组42例采用开放手术。术后随访6~12个月,比较2组的疗效。结果观察组手术时间长于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组的失血量、输血量及术后下床活动时间、肠道功能恢复时间、并发症发生率和住院时间均优于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论与开放根治性膀胱切除术比较,腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术治疗膀胱癌,微创性好、肠道功能恢复快、效果更为理想。     

腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除术的现状与争议

自1992年报道首例腹腔镜全膀胱切除术以来,国内泌尿外科医生在此方面进行了积极探索,初步的临床评价显示其可行性及诱人的应用前景,但该技术也面临着一系列问题,本文就其相关的问题进行讨论。     

机器人辅助腹腔镜与开放、腹腔镜下膀胱根治性切除及Bricker回肠膀胱术比较分析

目的 比较分析机器人辅助腹腔镜、传统腹腔镜以及开放手术下膀胱根治性切除+Bricker回肠膀胱术的围手术期资料及并发症情况. 方法 人组2010年1月至2015年10月在我院行膀胱根治性切除+Bricker回肠代膀胱术的132例膀胱癌患者,其中行开放手术者69例,行腹腔镜手术者57例,行机器人辅助腹腔镜手术者6例,比较各组手术时间、术中出血量、输血量、进食时间、拔管时间及术后住院时间等围手术期情况和术后并发症. 结果 全部手术均顺利完成,3组患者的术后进食时间和盆腔引流管拨管时间比较无差异.开放组手术时间[398(360,450)min]低于腹腔镜组[435(390,510)min](P =0.011),而机器人组手术时间[338(330,480)min]与开放组和腹腔镜组之间无差异.机器人组出血量[300(200,375)ml]低于腹腔镜组[700(400,1 200) ml](P =0.043)和开放组[1 200(800,2 000)ml](P＜0.001),腹腔镜组出血量低于开放组(P=0.003).机器人组术中所输红细胞量(0 U)低于开放组[6(4,7.5)u](P =0.001),与腹腔镜组[2(0,4)U]无差异,而腹腔镜组术中输红细胞量低于开放组(P＜0.001).术中输血浆量3组总体存在差异(P=0.040),但两两比较无差异.机器人组术后住院时间[11(10,19.5)d]少于开放组[19(14,23)d](P =0.027),腹腔镜组术后住院时间[15(13,20)d]与开放组及机器人组比较,均无差异.3组间肿瘤TNM分期、淋巴结阳性率及病理分级均无明显差异.3组患者间手术并发症比较,差异无统计学意义,以Clavien-Dindo评分对并发症进行分级,3组并发症分级无统计学差异. 结论 机器人辅助腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除+ Bricker回肠膀胱术具术中出血少、创伤小和术后恢复快的优势,是治疗浸润性膀胱癌安全有效的手术方法.     

3D腹腔镜与普通腹腔镜、开放根治性膀胱切除+肠道原位新膀胱术围手术期疗效的比较

目的 比较3D腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(3D-LRC)、腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(LRC)和开放根治性膀胱切除术(ORC)的疗效及围手术期并发症的发生差异.方法 回顾性分析大理白族自治州人民医院2008年9月至2020年6月行膀胱根治性切除术(RC)的患者资料,共148例,其中行ORC术62例、行LRC术32例、行3D-L...     

腹腔镜下根治性全膀胱切除+原位新膀胱术治疗进展

膀胱癌是泌尿系统发病率最高的恶性肿瘤,近年来其发病率仍然居高不下。全膀胱切除+尿流改道是手术治疗金标准。近年来腹腔镜手术以其创伤小、恢复快的优势逐渐进入人们的视野,腹腔镜下全膀胱切除术也逐渐被人们所接受。本文主要针对腹腔镜膀胱癌手术现状作一综述。     

膀胱根治性切除-原位回肠新膀胱术的腹腔镜与开放手术疗效比较

目的 比较腹腔镜与开放性膀胱根治性切除.原位回肠新膀胱术的临床疗效.方法 对我院施行的膀胱根治性切除-原位同肠新膀胱术171例进行随访,其中开放手术组63例,腹腔镜手术组108例,对两种术式的嗣手术期情况、术后并发症、新膀胱功能、肿瘤治疗效果等进行比较分析.结果 与开放手术组相比,腹腔镜组平均手术时间稍长(330 min比310 min,P>0.05),平均出血量明显较少(320 mi比1100 ml,P<0.001),术后肠道功能恢复时间较短(2.4 d比4.5 d,P<0.001),术后并发症发牛率较低(18.5%比30.0%,P<0.05).术后12个月日间/夜问尿控率相当(90.7%/82.6%比88.3%/81.6%,P>0.05).术后2年两组同一分期、分级无瘤生存率相当(P>0.05).结论 腹腔镜下膀胱根治性切除-原位回肠新膀胱术比开放性手术出血少,肠道功能恢复快,并发症少,术后控尿效果及初期肿瘤根治效果相当,长期肿瘤根治效果需要进一步随诊观察.     

经腹腔镜根治性全膀胱切除回肠原位代膀胱术11例

目的探讨腹腔镜技术在根治性全膀胱切除回肠原位代膀胱术中的应用价值。方法本组11例均为膀胱尿路上皮癌,TNM分期为T2aN0M07例、T3aN0M03例、T3bN0M01例,麻醉选择气管插管全身麻醉,采用五点穿刺法置入腹腔镜,手术方式为根治性全膀胱切除回肠原位代膀胱术。结果本组11例均手术顺利,无一例中转开放。手术时间为5～8h,平均7h;出血150～450ml,平均350ml。术后肠道功能恢复时间为2～5d,2例出现漏尿,均在14d内消失。术后随访时间为6～12个月,平均10个月。所有病例控尿情况均较理想,超声检查均未发现输尿管扩张、肾积水,2例代膀胱残余尿>100ml,均未发现复发及转移。结论根治性全膀胱切除回肠原位代膀胱术是膀胱癌治疗的一种有效方法。目前膀胱癌根治性切除术有开放性手术和经腹腔镜手术两种,与开放性手术比较,经腹腔镜手术虽具有诸多优势,但仍有必要对一些热点问题进行探讨,寻找更为合理的手术步骤、技巧和方法,从而进一步推动该项技术的发展。     

单孔腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除术10例报告

目的 探讨单孔腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术的可行性及初步经验.方法 采用单孔腹腔镜技术完成根治性膀胱切除术10例.男9例,女1例.取下腹正中3～4 cm切口,置入QuadPort(2例)或自制开口器(2环1套法,8例)建立单孔腹腔镜手术通道,术中采用常规和预弯腹腔镜器械.手术步骤包括双侧标准盆腔淋巴结清扫、根治性膀胱切除及开放构建全去带乙状结肠原位新膀胱.结果 10例手术顺利.无中转开放手术或传统腹腔镜手术,未增加其他通道.单孔部分手术时间130～330 min,平均243 min.术中失血50～600 ml,平均270 ml,5例需输浓缩红细胞2～4 U.盆腔淋巴结、尿道及输尿管切缘均阴性.病理报告均为尿路上皮癌T1N0M0 2例,T2aN0M0 6例,T3aN0M0 2例.无围手术期死亡及严重并发症的发生.8例完成6个月以上的随访,白天排尿均完全可控,4例有夜间遗尿,未见肿瘤复发和远处转移.结论 单孔腹腔镜膀胱癌根治性切除术安全可行,美容效果较好,短期随访肿瘤控制效果好.自制开口器制作简单,操作方便,气密性好,成本低,能够完成单孔腹腔镜手术.

Abstract：

Objective To present our initial experience of pure laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) for radical cystectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissections. Methods 10 patients with pathology confined bladder urothelial carcinoma underwent laparoendoscopic single-site radical cystectomy, including 9 males and 1 female. After a 3-4 cm lower median abdominal incision was made, quadport or homemade single multichannel port was inserted, and conventional and prebent laparoscopic instruments were utilized. The surgical procedure included bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomies, radical cystectomy and building with a sigmoid orthotopic neobladder by open surgery.Results No extra port needed, neither conversion to open or conventional laparoscopic surgery. The time of LESS procedure ranged from 130 to 330 min (mean 243 nin). Estimated blood loss ranged from 50 to 600 ml (mean 270 ml). 5 patients needed blood transfusion of 2 to 4 units. The pathologic evaluation revealed bladder urothelial carcinoma, negative margins and negative pelvic lymph node involvement. No mortality or severe complications were observed perioperatively. After followup of more than 6 months, all revealed controllable urination at daytime, while 4 revealed nocturnal incontinence and needed one or two pads during nighttime. No evidence of recurrent or metastatic disease was detected. Conclusions LESS radical cystectomy and bilateral lymphadenectomies was safe and feasible, and short-term follow-up showed good tumor control outcomes. Homemade single multichannel port made of two elastic ring and glove was simple and effective.     

Comparison of surgical stress response to laparoscopic and open radical cystectomy

Objectives  

To prospectively compare stress response to laparoscopic and open radical cystectomy by the measurement of humoral mediators and the incidence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS).     

腹腔镜和开放手术膀胱癌根治术疗效比较的Meta分析简

目的 利用Meta分析的方法,评价腹腔镜膀胱癌根治术（LRC）与开放性膀胱癌根治术（ORC）两种手术方式治疗浸润性膀胱癌的疗效。 方法 选取发表于中国核心期刊及PubMed上的1990-2012年的文献,对比LRC与ORC两种术式治疗浸润性膀胱癌的临床对照试验,并应用Meta分析评价手术所需时间、手术过程中出血量、手术过程中输血情况、术后胃肠道恢复情况、术后患者住院时间、术后并发症、切缘阳性率、膀胱容量、膀胱内压、残余尿等相关指标。结果 本篇Meta分析6篇临床同期对照试验。共纳入了597例患者,其中行LRC 336例患者,行ORC 261例患者。LRC手术所需时间（WMD 34.87 min,95%CI 25.94～43.79 min,P＜0.000 01）长于开放手术,而LRC手术过程中出血量（WMD -506.61 mL,95%CI-571.13～-442.09 mL,P＜0.000 01）、术中输血几率（OR 0.20,95% CI 0.11～0.38,P＜0.000 01）均小于ORC,术后胃肠道恢复时间（WMD -2.12 d,95% CI-2.20～ -2.03 d,P＜0.000 01）、术后患者住院时间（WMD -4.99 d,95% CI-5.79～-4.19 d,P＜0.000 01）、术后并发症发生率（OR 0.30,95% CI 0.18～0.48,P＜0.000 01）均少于ORC。LRC术后手术切缘阳性率、新膀胱的膀胱容量、膀胱内压、残余尿与ORC组均无统计学差异。 结论 对于浸润性膀胱癌,LRC的手术时间长于ORC,但在减少术中出血量、缩短术后肠道功能恢复时间及术后住院时间、降低并发症发生率方面更优越。而腹腔镜与ORC的手术切缘阳性率及新膀胱功能相似。     

Surgical margin status of open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy specimens

Objectives:   To compare the surgical margin (SM) status between open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RRP and LRP, respectively) specimens.
Methods:   Surgical specimens from 137 patients undergoing LRP and 220 patients undergoing RRP for clinically localized prostate cancer were included in the analysis. SM status in each resected specimen, including the number of positive SM as well as their location, was examined.
Results:   The incidence of positive SM in the LRP group was significantly greater than that in the RRP group. Despite the lack of significant difference in the proportion of solitary positive SM between these two groups, the proportion of multiple positive SM in the LRP group was significantly greater than that in the RRP group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anterior positive SM between the two groups, while the incidences of positive SM at the apex, posterior site and bladder neck in the LRP group were significantly greater than those in the RRP group. Furthermore, there were no significant preoperative parameters predicting positive SM in the LRP group. On the other hand, the biopsy Gleason score and clinical T stage were identified as significant predictors of positive SM in the RRP group, of which the biopsy Gleason score was independently related to the presence of positive SM.
Conclusions:   Clinical T stage and Gleason score could be useful predictors of SM status following RRP, while positive SM in LRP specimens were detected irrespective of preoperative parameters, suggesting the need for an effort for further refining the LRP procedure.     

腹腔镜膀胱癌根治术与开放性膀胱癌根治术临床疗效比较

目的比较腹腔镜膀胱癌根治术(LRC)与开放性膀胱癌根治术(ORC)两种手术方式治疗膀胱癌的临床疗效。方法对48例膀胱癌患者行腹腔镜下根治性膀胱全切+回肠膀胱腹壁造口术。结果 LRC手术时间长于ORC组,在术后血红蛋白(Hb)下降、术后肠道功能恢复时间、术后盆腔引流管留置时间、术后住院时间方面明显小于ORC组,差异有统计学意义(P0.0001);在术后并发症(尿瘘、尿路感染、肠粘连等)差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论与ORC比较,LRC具有失血量少、创伤小、术后恢复快等优点,将成为治疗膀胱癌的主要手术方式之一。     

Comparative analysis of outcomes and costs following open radical cystectomy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy: results from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample

Background

Although robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy (RARC) was first reported in 2003 and has gained popularity, comparisons with open radical cystectomy (ORC) are limited to reports from high-volume referral centers.

Objective

To compare population-based perioperative outcomes and costs of ORC and RARC.

Design, setting, and participants

A retrospective observational cohort study using the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample to characterize 2009 RARC compared with ORC use and outcomes.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Propensity score methods were used to compare inpatient morbidity and mortality, lengths of stay, and costs.

Results and limitations

We identified 1444 ORCs and 224 RARCs. Women were less likely to undergo RARC than ORC (9.8% compared with 15.5%, p = 0.048), and 95.7% of RARCs and 73.9% of ORCs were performed at teaching hospitals (p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, subjects undergoing RARC compared with ORC experienced fewer inpatient complications (49.1% and 63.8%, p = 0.035) and fewer deaths (0% and 2.5%, p < 0.001). RARC compared with ORC was associated with lower parenteral nutrition use (6.4% and 13.3%, p = 0.046); however, there was no difference in length of stay. RARC compared with ORC was $3797 more costly (p = 0.023). Limitations include retrospective design, absence of tumor characteristics, and lack of outcomes beyond hospital discharge.

Conclusions

RARC is associated with lower parenteral nutrition use and fewer inpatient complications and deaths. However, lengths of stay are similar, and the robotic approach is significantly more costly.     

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy

Recent reports have demonstrated that robot-assisted laparoscopic cystectomy is technically feasible. However, wide-spread acceptance of this promising technique is limited due to long operating times and lacking long-term data especially on oncological outcome. After establishing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (n=250) we report technical and functional results of a large series of patients undergoing laparoscopic cystectomy with the da Vinci surgical system (DVSS).27 patients (24 males) underwent laparoscopic radical cystectomy with the DVSS (Intuitive Surgical) between Jan 2004 and Dec 2006. Indications for cystectomy were muscle-invasive transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) or leiomyosarcoma of the urinary bladder (n=24) and bladder shrinking following prior radiotherapy for TCC (n=3). A pelvic lymphadenectomy was routine part of the procedure. Urinary diversions were ilieal conduits (n=19) and ileal neobladders (n=8).Mean operating time was 340 minutes (range 150-450) with a mean blood loss of 301 mL (range 50-550). The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved during lymphadenectomy was 23. Surgical margins were negative except in one case. After a mean follow-up of 10.2 months, 2 perioperative (anastomotic leakage, adhesions) and 3 postoperative complications (ileus, intestinal fistula) occurred. 6/7 patients reported satisfying erectile function following nerve-sparing surgery. Day-time continence was completely restored after a mean 3.5 months in 7/8 patients.Robot-assisted laparoscopic cystectomy is a safe procedure. Satisfying functional and oncological short-term results can be achieved within acceptable operating time limits.