原发性肝癌规则与非规则性肝切除术式探讨

目的 分析原发性肝癌规则性肝切除和非规则性肝切除的围手术期因素,探讨原发性肝癌治疗中二者手术适应证。方法 回顾性分析中国人民解放军空军总医院1990-2010年原发性肝癌中274例规则性肝切除术和586例非规则性肝切除术病人的临床资料。结果 统计分析表明,规则性肝切除与非规则性肝切除相比,对术前病人肝功能状态要求更加严格,术中切除肝体积以及出血量、输血量均较非规则性肝切除组显著增多,手术时间延长,术后并发症发生率增加。但实施规则性肝切除术病人的肿瘤体积明显大于非规则性肝切除病人,切除肝段数目大于三段者所占比例亦显著高于非规则性肝切除组。结论 对于＜5cm的肝癌病人,采用非规则性肝切除保留更多功能性肝实质,可能更有利于病人术后恢复,减少相关并发症的发生。     

肝恶性肿瘤两种肝切除手术方式围手术期相关因素的对比研究

目的 探讨肝脏恶性肿瘤实施规则性肝切除或非规则性肝切除的围手术期因素,比较二者在围手术期中的优越性.方法 回顾性分析研究解放军空军总医院和解放军总医院1986～2009年1019例肝脏恶性肿瘤肝切除的手术期和围手术期因素.结果 多因素分析表明,对于肝脏恶性肿瘤患者,规则性肝切除在术中失血量、术后并发症、住院死亡率、术后住院天数等方面与非规则性肝切除无显著差异,但规则性肝切除术的手术时间显著多于非规则性肝切除术(P＜0.001,OR=1.004).结论 虽然从肿瘤学上讲对肝恶性肿瘤实施规则性肝段切除比非规则性肝切除更具优势,但在临床实践中与非规则性肝切除相比,规则性肝切除围手术期风险没有显著优势.     

规则性或非规则性肝癌切除术治疗单发小肝癌的预后分析

目的分析规则性或非规则性肝癌切除术治疗单发小肝癌的预后情况。方法回顾性分析2009年2月至2014年2月我院诊治的58例单发小肝癌患者临床资料,将实施规则性切除术者纳入对照组(n=28),实施非规则性切除术者纳入观察组(n=30),术后均随访3年,比较两组手术时间、住院时间、术中出血量、切除肿瘤直径、切缘大小,测定两组手术前后血清白蛋白(Alb)、谷丙转氨酶(ALT)、总胆红素(TBIL)、直接胆红素(DBIL)水平,并对比术后1~3年内两组复发率、无瘤生存率、总生存率及并发症发生率。结果观察组手术时间(180.23±1.66)min短于对照组,观察组切除肿瘤直径(6.13±1.32)cm、切缘大小(2.71±0.15)cm小于对照组,两组住院时间、术中出血量比较无显著差异(P0.05);术后观察组血清Alb(32.18±1.06)g/L、ALT(26.29±0.11)μmol/L较对照组显著下降,观察组TBIL(18.29±1.33)μmol/L、DBIL(13.24±1.20)μmol/L明显高于对照组(P0.05);观察组术后1年、2年、3年复发率、无瘤生存率、总生存率与对照组同时点比较均无统计学意义(PO.05);观察组术后并发症发生率6.67%低于对照组28.57%(P0.05)。结论非规则性肝切除术治疗单发小肝癌具有手术时间短、切缘小、并发症发生率低优点,术后肝功能恢复较规则性肝切除术好,术后3年内复发率、无瘤生存率、总生存率与规则性手术比较无显著差异,值得在临床推广实践。     

解剖性肝切除和非解剖性肝切除对中国肝癌分期Ⅰa期患者预后影响的荟萃分析

目的选择中国肝癌分期Ⅰa期肝细胞癌患者, 评价解剖性肝切除和非解剖性肝切除对预后的影响。方法计算机检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase数据库中2000年1月至2021年3月关于中国肝癌分期Ⅰa期肝细胞癌解剖性肝切除与非解剖性切除的文章, 对患者特征、肿瘤特征、手术特征、术后病理特征和远期预后进行系统评价。结果共纳入9项病例对照研究, 2 761例患者, 其中解剖性肝切除组1 727例, 非解剖性肝切除组1 034例。与非解剖性肝切除组比较, 解剖性肝切除组基线特征为肝硬化占比更少、肝脏储备功能更好、Child-Pugh A级占比更多;另外, 解剖性肝切除组的肿瘤长径更大、微血管侵犯率更高、手术时间更长、术中失血量更多。长期预后方面, 与非解剖性肝切除组相比, 解剖性肝切除组获得了更好的术后5年无瘤生存率[比值比(OR)=1.54, 95%CI:1.30～1.82, P<0.001]和5年总体生存[OR=1.27, 95%CI:1.04～1.55, P=0.018]。结论解剖性肝切除对于降低中国肝癌分期Ⅰa期肝细胞癌患者远期复发和改善长期生存显著优于非解...     

ԭ���Ըΰ�������ǹ����Ը��г���ʽ̽��

目的分析原发性肝癌规则性肝切除和非规则性肝切除的围手术期因素,探讨原发性肝癌治疗中二者手术适应证。方法回顾性分析中国人民解放军空军总医院1990-2010年原发性肝癌中274例规则性肝切除术和586例非规则性肝切除术病人的临床资料。结果统计分析表明,规则性肝切除与非规则性肝切除相比,对术前病人肝功能状态要求更加严格,术中切除肝体积以及出血量、输血量均较非规则性肝切除组显著增多,手术时间延长,术后并发症发生率增加。但实施规则性肝切除术病人的肿瘤体积明显大于非规则性肝切除病人,切除肝段数目大于三段者所占比例亦显著高于非规则性肝切除组。结论对于<5cm的肝癌病人,采用非规则性肝切除保留更多功能性肝实质,可能更有利于病人术后恢复,减少相关并发症的发生。     

非规则性肝切除治疗原发性肝癌的疗效分析

目的 探讨非规则性肝切除治疗原发性肝癌的临床价值。方法 回顾性分析我院1994年1月～2003年12月收治的350例接受不规则性肝切除术的肝癌患者的临床资料。结果 术后并发症的发生率和病死率分别为16．51％和2．53％，累积1、3、5年生存率分别为65．82％、41．24％和19．83％，术后化疗次数、血管受侵、肝被膜受侵和术前肝功能情况是影响手术切除后疗效的重要因素。结论 对于慢性肝炎和肝硬化的肝癌，非规则性肝叶切除可达到根治的效果，也是安全可行的治疗方法。     

不规则肝切除治疗肝细胞癌

规则性肝切除术因其理论上能够根除肝内可能转移病灶被认为是肝癌治疗的标准术式,但对于伴有严重肝硬化的患者而言,因其较差的肝功能情况,且一系列研究证实距肿瘤切缘的距离并不影响肿瘤术后的复发,规则性肝切除也不能提高肝癌患者术后的生存率,因此作者认为对单个肿瘤直径<5 c     

CLIP评分系统评价肝癌患者手术方式及预后

目的 探讨CLIP评分系统对可手术切除性肝癌术式选择的作用及与患者无瘤生存率的关系.方法 回顾分析1996-2004年157例行根治性肝切除肝癌患者的临床病理资料.并按CLIP评分系统0分、1分、2分和大于等于3分的标准分组,比较各组患者的无瘤生存率,比较规则性肝切除和不规则性肝切除患者的无瘤生存率.结果 本组患者1、3、5年无瘤生存率分别为63.6%、45.2%、35.7%,各组间的无瘤生存率比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).在CLIP评分0分组中,行规则性肝切除与不规则性肝切除患者的术后无瘤生存率比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01),其他组中规则性肝切除和不规则性肝切除患者的术后无瘤生存率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 CLIP评分系统是评价原发性肝癌术后复发的有效工具;CLIP评分0分的肝癌患者作规则性肝切除的术后复发率远低于行不规则性肝切除.     

精准肝切除与非规则性肝切除治疗肝癌的疗效分析

目的：探讨精准肝切除与非规则性肝切除术治疗肝癌的临床效果。
方法：采用非规则性肝切除(38例)与精准肝切除(21例)治疗肝癌,比较两种术式围手术期和随访情况,包括术中出血量和输血量、术后AST水平、标本切缘阳性率、并发症发生率、术后1年复发率和生存率等进行数据分析,对随访1～2年的临床资料亦进行分析。
结果：全组无围手术期死亡。精准组和非规则组术中失血量无统计学差异［（650±610）mL vs.（1050±910）mL,t=1.628,P＞0.05］;精准组术中输血量较非规则组少［（350±250）mL vs.（750±500）mL,t=2.520,P＜0.05］;精准组术后AST上升幅度较非规则组小［（169±131） U/L vs.（350±293）U/L,t=2.455, P＜0.05］;肿瘤标本切缘阳性率分别为4.8%（1/21）和21.1%（8/38）（P＜0.05）;围手术期并发症的发生率精准组较非规则组低［33.3%（7/21）vs. 71.1%（27/38）,P＜0.05］;术后1年肿瘤复发率精准组较非规则组低［23.8%（5/21）vs.44.7%（17/38）］;术后1年生存率两组无统计学差异［85.7%（18/21）和78.9%（30/38）,P＞0.05］。
结论：精准肝切除较之非规则性肝切除术治疗肝癌,手术损伤小、并发症少、术后恢复快、疗效较好。

     

腹腔镜下规则性肝切除

肝脏外科实际上是外科手术与肝脏解剖的有机结合。由于对肝解剖缺乏认识,20世纪40年代以前的肝切除均为非规则性的局部切除。50年代中期．Goldsmith和Woodburne强调肝切除应严格遵循肝脏内部的解剖．提出了规则性肝切除术的概念。特别是Couinand提出肝功能性分段以来,规则性肝切除得以迅速发展。欧美国家的肝肿瘤多为转移性、无肝硬化,所以一直沿着这一方向发展。     

Abdominosacral resection for locally recurring rectal cancer

AIM To investigate feasibility and outcome of abdominalsacral resection for treatment of locally recurrent rectal adenocarcinoma.METHODS A population of patients who underwent an abdominalsacral resection for posterior recurrent adenocarcinoma of the rectum at the National Cancer Institute of Milano, between 2005 and 2013, is considered. Retrospectively collected data includes patient characteristics, treatment and pathology details regarding the primary and the recurrent rectal tumor surgical resection. A clinical and instrumental follow-up was performed. Surgical and oncological outcome were investigated. Furthermore an analytical review of literature was conducted in order to compare our case series with other reported experiences.RESULTS At the time of abdomino-sacral resection, the mean age of patients was 55(range, 38-64). The median operating time was 380 min(range, 270-480). Sacral resection was performed at S2/S3 level in 3 patients, S3/S4 in 3 patients and S4/S5 in 4 patients. The median operating time was 380 ± 58 min. Mean intraoperative blood loss was 1750 m L(range, 200-680). The median hospital stay was 22 d. Overall morbidity was 80%, mainly type Ⅱ complication according to the ClavienDindo classification. Microscopically negative margins(R0) is obtained in all patients. Overall 5-year survival after first surgical procedure is 60%, with a mediansurvival from the first surgery of 88 ± 56 mo. The most common site of re-recurrence was intrapelvic.CONCLUSION Sacral resection represents a feasible approach to posterior rectal cancer recurrence without evidence of distant spreading. An accurate staging is essential for planning the best therapy.     

Low anterior resection versus abdominoperineal excision: A comparison of local recurrence after curative surgery for “very low” rectal cancer

In the controversy regarding whether sphinctersaving resection (SSR) or abdominoperineal resection (APER) is more appropriate for the treatment of very low rectal cancer, local recurrence rates seem to play a fundamental role in patient outcome. In order to operate an effective patient selection, very low rectal cancer is defined herein as being located within 4.5 to 7.5 cm from the anal verge. This retrospective report investigates the incidence of local recurrence after curative surgery for very low rectal carcinoma in 24 consecutive patients treated by the same surgical team over a 15-year period using the above surgical procedures. In the APER group, the local recurrence rate was 45.5%, occurring in 5 of 11 cases; and in the SSR group 46.1%, occurring in 6 of 13 cases, with no significant difference between the two groups. Recurrence was found within one year of surgical treatment in all except one case. Despite the strict follow-up program, it was only possible to perform reoperation in two recurrent cases, both previously submitted to SSR and diagnosed by means of transanal ultrasonography and macrobiopsy. The high incidence of local recurrence in this series is explained by the advanced stage of disease in the majority of cases. Thus, as the choice between APER and SSR does not seem to affect the incidence of local recurrence, which is related more to tumor size, site, stage, and grading, preservation of the sphincters and restoration of digestive continuity should be achieved whenever technically possible.     

31例肝内复发性肝癌的再切除治疗分析

目的：探讨肝内复发性肝癌的再切除治疗的价值。方法：对1980年至2000年31例肝内复发性肝癌的临床资料、手术方法及预后进行回顾性分析。结果：全组无手术死亡，术后1、3、5年生存率分别为93．5％，69．2％及50．1％，二次切除后的1、3、5年生存率分别为82．1％、32．8％及25．4％，最长一例已无瘤生存12年，而140例未再手术者的5年生存率仅9．3％，其中TACE组及PEI组的5年生存率相似，分别为12．2％及14．8％。结论：再手术切除是治疗肝内复发肝癌最有效的方法，对不能手术者，我们推荐使用PEI术。     

Local recurrence after curative anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum

From 1972 to 1985, 60 patients with rectal carcinoma underwent curative anterior resections. There was a local recurrence in three (5 per cent). Pelvic recurrence was seen in two patients and a there was suture line recurrence in one. The length of the distal margin of the normal bowel or lymph node involvement did not appear to be a significant determining factor of the local recurrence. As for the factor responsible for the recurrence, tumor implantation into the pelvic cavity or into the suture line was suspected. Care should be taken to avoid implantion of tumor cells during operative procedures. There were no local recurrences in patients with lower rectal carcinoma. This finding might be related to the selection of patients with carcinoma of stage I and II.     

胃癌术后复发因素的分析

回顾性分析胃癌术后复发的主要因素,改进胃癌的诊治措施。方法：回顾性分析1995年1月～1999年12月我科收治的25例胃癌复发行再手术病例。结果：胃癌术后复发的主要部位是腹腔、腹膜、淋巴结和吻合口区,其根本原因是肿瘤组织的浆膜浸润、淋巴清扫术不够彻底和不规范切除(D≤N)以及切缘的潜在阳性。结论：胃癌的疾病分期和合理有效的综合治疗是影响复发的根本原因。胃癌的早诊早治是提高预后和降低术后复发的重要手段。     

Local recurrence after abdomino-perineal resection

Objective  Local recurrence of rectal cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality following curative resection. The published rates vary after abdomino-perineal resection (APR) from 5% to 47%. The aim of this study was to evaluate local recurrence following curative APR for low rectal cancer in our unit.
Method  The medical notes of patients treated between 1st January 1996 and 31st December 2000 were retrieved. Local recurrence was defined as the presence of tumour within the pelvis confirmed by clinical findings, pathological specimen or radiological reports. A curative resection was defined as excision of tumour in the absence of macroscopic metastatic disease and whose resection margins were greater than 1 mm circumferentially and 10 mm distally. Outcomes and survival were compared using Fisher's exact test and Kaplan–Meier method.
Results  Two hundred consecutive cases with a diagnosis of rectal cancer were identified of which 139 underwent a curative resection (69.5%). Of these 40 patients (28%) underwent APR with curative intent. Two patients (5%) developed local recurrence at 18 and 24 months respectively. The overall local recurrence rate for all curative rectal cancer surgery, in the same period was 2.6%. Eleven patients have died in the follow-up period of which nine were cancer-related deaths.
Conclusion  The local recurrence rates achieved with APR were not significantly different from those achieved with restorative operations. Tumours at the ano-rectal junction should not be dissected off the pelvic floor, but radically excised en bloc with the surrounding levator ani, as a cylinder, as originally described by Miles.     

局部切除术治疗早期低位直肠癌的研究

目的探讨局部切除术治疗早期低位直肠癌的疗效。方法对比随机分组的39例局部切除（TAR组）与35例腹会阴联合切除（APR组）的早期低位直肠癌的治疗效果。术后平均随访6．3年。结果无围手术期死亡。TAR组的并发症发生率7．7％，低于APR组（28．6％）（P=0．030）。TAR组局部复发3例（7．7％），APR组2例（5．7％），P=0．786；TAR组远处转移2例（5．1％），APR组1例（2．8％），P=0．859；TAR组5年生存率89．5％，APR组91．3％，P=0．792，差异均无统计学意义。结论对于未累及肌层的早期低位直肠癌，局部切除术可以获得满意的肿瘤根治效果，同时患者能保留肛门括约功能而获得较高的生活质量。     

Results of salvage abdominoperineal resection for recurrent anal carcinoma following combined chemoradiation therapy

Combined chemotherapy and radiation therapy is the standard treatment for epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal. Failures are often not associated with distant recurrence and are therefore potentially amenable to salvage abdominoperineal resection. The aim of this study was to review our experience with abdominoperineal resection following failure of chemoradiation therapy for epidermoid carcinoma of the anus. Between 1980 and 1998, 17 patients underwent salvage abdominoperineal resection following failure of chemoradiation therapy. Four patients were excluded from survival analysis because resection was performed with palliative intent. Survival curves were based on the method of Kaplan and Meier, and univariate analysis of predictive variables was performed using the log-rank test. Twelve patients underwent abdominoperineal resection for persistent disease and five patients for recurrent disease. No operative deaths occurred, but local complications including perineal wound infection and wound break-down was seen in 8 of 17 patients and 6 of 17 patients, respectively. Patients undergoing omental flap reconstruction (n = 3) or no pelvic reconstruction (n = 5) had a higher incidence of perineal breakdown compared to those undergoing muscle flap reconstruction (n = 9) (P <0.05). The median follow-up time for the patients operated on with curative intent was 53 months. The S-year actuarial survival was 47%. Potential prognostic factors that were not found to have an impact on survival included margin status of resection, sphincter invasion, and degree of differentiation. Only pathologic tumor size greater than 5.0 cm (P <0.00l) and age over 55 years (P <0.0.5) adversely affected survival. Selected patients with recurrent or persistent anal carcinoma following chemoradiation therapy can be offered salvage abdominoperineal resection. This operation is associated with a high incidence of local wound complications, and muscle flap reconstruction should be considered when possible. Prolonged survival can be achieved in some patients following salvage resection for epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal.     

Recurrence and survival for hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection: Tertiary centre experience

Aim: The aim of the present paper was to determine the pattern of recurrence and prediction for survival after primary curative surgical resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods: This was a retrospective single institutional review. During 2002–2005, 197 patients had hepatectomies at Queen Elizabeth Hospital The total number of patients with primary curative liver resection was 113, and 103 patients were included in this survival analysis. Results: The recurrence rate was 49/103 (47.6%). The operative mortality rate was 4/113 (3.5%). The median time for recurrence was 13.5 months (range, 1–60 months). The mean follow‐up period was 26.03 months (range, 1–60 months).Overall survival was 90%, 72% and 50%, at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively, and disease‐free survival was 55%, 48% and 42%, at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. On univariate analysis, tumour > 10 cm, close (≤ 1 mm)/focally involved/involved resection margin, operative blood loss > 2500 mL, presence of satellite tumour nodules, vascular invasion and poor tumour differentiation were found to be associated with recurrence. On multivariate analysis presence of multiple satellite tumour nodules and presence of vascular invasion predicted poor disease‐free survival whereas vascular invasion was the only predictor for overall survival. Conclusion: Patients who had curative surgical resection for HCC should be considered for adjuvant therapy when these high‐risk factors are present.