2009年我国外科学术研究进展

普通外科学 一、肝脏外科 近年来,微创技术在肝脏外科的应用越来越广泛,主要包括腹腔镜肝切除和各种经皮经肝的消融治疗技术.这些技术的不断发展与应用,使微创外科技术与肝脏外科的联系更加紧密并显著提高了肝脏外科的治疗水平.腹腔镜肝切除已从原来的仅行肝边缘小肿瘤的切除,发展到可行左半或右半肝切除.     

精确肝切除术的临床应用

精确肝切除是依据肝脏的解剖学特点,以解剖肝脏叶段肝静脉为中心,完整切除病灶并最大限度保留残肝血供及血液流出道、胆道的一种技术[1]综合应用血流阻断技术、B超引导穿刺染色技术及肝静脉解剖技术可以精确切除病灶区域肝脏,达到既保留功能肝脏,又切除足够病灶的目的[2].精确肝切除技术符合现代外科学精细解剖的要求,是肝脏外科的发展方向之一.     

腹腔镜肝切除研究进展

开腹肝切除一直是肝脏良恶性病变的有效治疗方式.但开腹肝切除手术创伤大,术后并发症多.如何降低肝脏手术创伤也是摆在肝脏外科医师面前的一道难题.腹腔镜技术的兴起为肝脏外科医师提供了一条途径.但腹腔镜肝切除技术尚未成熟,本文就有关腹腔镜肝切除的相关情况进行综述.     

肝切除技术的现状

随着对肝脏解剖认识的深入,CT、MRI等影像学技术的发展、新的断肝器械的应用以及外科技术的进步,肝切除的并发症和死亡率都明显下降;随着腹腔镜技术在肝脏外科的应用,肝切除技术又有了新的发展空间,现仅就肝切除技术现状作简要回顾.     

肝切除术后肝功能不全诊治进展

<正>自1887年德国医生完成世界首例肝脏切除术后,肝脏外科已经走过百余年历程。近年来肝脏外科发展迅速,精准肝切除、解剖性肝切除已成为肝切除的主流手术方式,且手术技术相关死亡率、并发症发生率显著下降。在专业的肝脏外科术中,肝切除死亡率已降至1%以下,而肝切除术后肝功能不全甚至肝衰竭已成为患者围手术期及影响患者术后生存的重要原因。肝切除术前精准的肝脏储备功能评估、术中肝切除量的把握、及术后的监测、治疗,有助于针对不同患     

肝切除断面处理

自1888年Langenbuch为肝脏肿瘤病人施行肝切除术后，至今肝脏外科已有100多年历史。我国从60年代开始施行肝切除手术，70年代就取得了巨大的进展，现在肝切除已成为我国县级以上医院肝胆外科乃至普通外科医生的常规临床治疗操作，肝切除例数位居世界第一。肝脏外科解剖认识的深入、现代外科技术的进步和手术器械的发展已经使肝切除手术死亡率和术后并发症率大为降低，     

解剖性肝切除手术切面的确定

解剖性肝切除是精准肝脏外科的重要组成部分。精确判定拟切除肝段的边界是实施解剖性肝切除的前提和关键。综合应用肝脏解剖学标志和术中超声定位技术、选择性目标肝蒂阻断技术、目标肝段门静脉染色技术及以肝静脉为导向的肝实质离断技术可以帮助在术中精准地确定肝脏切面并引导切面走向。解剖性肝切除的效果应以肝脏切面标志血管的显露和剩余肝组织的缺血或瘀血区域来判定。     

努力加强联合肝脏分隔和门静脉结扎的二步切肝法的临床应用和研究

正2000年以后,肝脏外科进入了快速发展阶段,一方面,微创肝切除技术逐渐成熟及普及,绝大部分三级医院都开始广泛开展腹腔镜下肝切除,机器人肝切除也日趋广泛;另一方面,相对于微创,肝切除的"巨创"(masive invasion)手术逐渐抬头,包括困难肝切除中导入了血管外科技术(如肝动脉、门静脉、肝静脉及腔静脉的切除重建)、体外肝切除、自体肝移植、联合肝脏分隔和门静脉结扎的二步切肝法(associating liver partition and portal     

信息动态

目前,在肝癌的治疗中手术切除仍是最主要的治疗手段,部分肝脏良性疾病亦需要手术切除治疗.随着外科技术的发展,解剖性肝切除在国内各肝脏中心被广泛应用.因肝脏本身在解剖及功能方面的特殊性,在肝切除术中最大限度地保证残余肝脏功能的同时又能安全、有效地完整切除肿瘤,对肿瘤的术后复发和转移具有重要意义.近年来随着影像技术及计算机辅助手术规划系统地不断发展,肝脏外科也逐渐向精准肝脏外科方向发展[1].     

腹腔镜肝切除术中的肝血流阻断技术

近十余年来,腹腔镜肝切除已取得很大进步,肝切除的范围已由肝脏边缘、浅表病变的局部切除扩大到解剖性半肝乃至尾状叶的切除。据最新报道[1],全球范围内腹腔镜肝切除已逾3000例。肝脏外科在朝着精准与微创的方向发展,腹腔镜下的肝脏血流阻断技术的应用和发展是肝切除技术发展的重要基础,它是大规模开展腹腔镜肝切除的重要前提。     

Coagulation changes during liver resection]

Thrombin-antithrombin III complex (TAT) and plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI) were measured during liver resection surgery in 8 patients. TAT and PAI activities of patients under liver resection were compared with those of 11 patients under resection of esophageal carcinoma. TAT activity increased during liver resection (P < 0.001) and reached 14 times (P < 0.001) of its control value in the recovery room. PAI activity was very stable during operation, but increased to twice (P < 0.01) of its control value in the recovery room. TAT activity of patients after liver surgery in the recovery room was (P < 0.05) more than twice of that of patients after esophageal surgery. We conclude that hypercoagulable state occurred during liver resection to a greater degree compared with that observed with esophageal surgery, and that its cause might be liver resection itself.     

Stellenwert laparoskopischer Leberresektionen

Whereas in other fields of surgery minimally invasive techniques have replaced the open surgery approach, liver resection is still a domain of conventional surgery. However, it is internationally emerging that laparoscopic hepatic surgery will become more important by conceptional improvements. This article describes the technical aspects of laparoscopic liver resection, in particular the procedure with respect to the individual liver segments. The advantages and disadvantages of the minimally invasive technique and also the indications for laparoscopic liver resection will be discussed.     

流域学说指导下的机器人肝脏肿瘤靶域切除技术实践

目的总结流域学说指导下开展机器人肝脏肿瘤靶域切除技术的经验和技术要点。 方法回顾性分析2021年10月至2022年12月笔者团队62例采用机器人肝脏肿瘤靶域切除术患者资料。术前进行靶域分析、结合肿瘤生物学特性确定靶域切除范围，术中循个体化解剖标志施行肿瘤靶域切除。 结果62例患者均顺利完成手术，其中左半肝加尾状叶切除3例、右肝加尾状叶切除1例、左肝肿瘤切除12例、中肝肿瘤切除7例、右肝肿瘤切除35例、尾状叶肿瘤切除4例，无中转开腹手术。手术时间、术中出血量的中位数分别为188 min(70～510 min)、50 mL(5～1 100 mL)。术中大出血(≥800 mL)2例。术后出现胆漏2例，均非手术治疗痊愈。术后住院时间中位数为7 d(3～28 d)。无二次手术及死亡病例。 结论肝脏肿瘤靶域切除技术是安全可行的，以肿瘤生物学特性为核心，个体化解剖标志为导向，外科机器人和多种技术的综合应用有助于靶域切除技术的实施。     

机器人肝脏切除手术的临床现状与研究进展

随着外科手术器械和腹腔镜技术的不断发展,肝脏外科已经进入微创外科和精准外科时代。机器人辅助肝脏切除术已包含几乎所有传统开腹手术的适应证。目前临床研究显示,与开腹手术和传统腹腔镜手术相比,达芬奇手术机器人在肝脏切除术中的应用是安全、可行的。本文综合文献报道及临床实践,针对达芬奇机器人在肝脏切除术的临床现状和研究进展做一综述。     

Single-Port Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Largest Turkish Experience

Single-port laparoscopic surgery has the advantage of a hidden scar and reduced abdominal wall trauma. Although single-port laparoscopic surgery is widely performed for other organs, its application is very limited for liver resection. Here, we report our experience with nine patients who underwent single-port laparoscopic liver resection. Nine patients underwent single-port laparoscopic liver resection for the indications of hydatid cyst, hepatocellular carcinoma, and colorectal cancer liver metastasis. Nine patients were successfully treated with single-port laparoscopic surgery. The operative time was between 60 and 240 min. The only operative complication was bleeding up to 650 mL in a patient with cirrhosis. No postoperative complications occurred. All patients were discharged earlier than usual. Single-port laparoscopic liver surgery is a challenging surgery. Surgeon with the experience of laparoscopic liver surgery should perform the single-port laparoscopic liver surgery. It is technically feasible with a good outcome in well-selected patients. Initial cases must be benign lesions to avoid jeopardizing oncological safety.     

原发性肝癌手术方式选择与原则

手术切除仍是原发性肝癌首选的治疗方法,兼顾肿瘤根治与手术安全是肝癌手术治疗的基本原则。作为肝胆外科医生,术者需结合自身经验与患者具体情况,选用简单有效、安全合理的切除方法、阻断技术和断肝设备,并按照规范化的手术方案进行个体化的肝癌切除。     

Updates and Critical Insights on Glissonian Approach in Liver Surgery

Recent advances in surgical techniques have broadened the indications of surgical management of liver malignancies. Intraoperative bleeding is one of the known predictors of postoperative outcomes following liver surgery, signifying the importance of vascular control during liver resection. Furthermore, preservation of future liver remnant plays a critical role in prevention of post-hepatectomy liver failure as one of the main causes of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Glissonian approach liver resection offers an effective method for vascular inflow control while protecting future liver remnant from ischemia-reperfusion injury. Several studies have demonstrated the feasibility of Glisson’s pedicle resection technique in modern liver surgery with an acceptable safety profile. Moreover, with increasing popularity of minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic liver resection via Glissonian approach has been shown to be superior to standard laparoscopic hepatectomy. Herein, we systematically review the role of Glissonian approach hepatectomy in current practice of liver surgery, highlighting its advantages and disadvantaged over other methods of vascular control.     

How far should we treat metastatic liver cancer? Report of three long-term survivors

The major issue in treating metastatic liver cancer is: how far should we perform resection? We believe that only reports of long-term survival afford an answer to this problem. We report three such patients. The first patient underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer of the papilla of the duodenum and resection of metastatic liver cancer. She is alive without recurrence 15 years and 1 month after the initial surgery. The second patient received low anterior resection for rectal cancer, extended right lobectomy for liver metastasis, and pancreatoduodenectomy for metastasis at the common bile duct. She survived 6 years and 9 months after the initial surgery. The third patient underwent right nephrectomy for Wilms' tumor (adult type), extended right lobectomy for liver metastasis, and repeat resection of recurrences at the mediastinum and in the thoracic and abdominal walls. She is alive 21 years and 2 months after the initial surgery. These experiences have prompted us to carry out resection when surgery is deemed feasible.     

Role for extending hepatic resection using an aggressive approach to liver surgery

BACKGROUND: The definition of what is unresectable in liver surgery is controversial. Problems that many believe render patients unresectable can currently be resected using advanced techniques of liver surgery. This study assesses liver resection in patients who were unresectable with standard liver resection but were potentially resectable using an aggressive approach to liver surgery. STUDY DESIGN: From 1997 to 2007, 830 adult patients undergoing hepatectomy were reviewed. Patients were categorized as having unresectable disease by standard resection if the disease could not be resected without resection of the IVC, hepatic vasculature, or because of tumor extent. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were initially believed to have unresectable disease but went on to laparotomy. Eighteen patients were unresectable at operation, although 98 patients were resected. Seventy-eight trisectionectomies; 18 lobectomies; 1 mesohepatectomy; and 1 segment 5, 6 resection, combined with pancreaticoduodenectomy, nephrectomy, and colectomy, were performed. Fourteen patients also had pancreatic resections. Vascular reconstructions were performed on the IVC (n = 35), hepatic veins (n = 21), portal vein (n = 34), and hepatic artery (n = 5). Hypothermic perfusion of the liver was used in 12 patients (4 ex vivo, 8 in situ cold perfusion). Patients undergoing resection had 6% mortality with a morbidity of 35%. Median survival was 37 months (95% CI, 34-42 months). Five-year actuarial survival was 32%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with liver tumors considered "unresectable" by standard liver resection should be considered for resection with an aggressive approach to liver surgery. Five-year survival of approximately one-third of patients can be expected.