Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery in Elderly Patients with Rectal Cancer

Background: Laparoscopic colorectal resection has been gaining popularity over the past two decades-and the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer treated with a surgical modality has gradually increased. However, studies about laparoscopic rectal surgery in elderly patients with long-term oncologic outcomes are limited. In this study, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic resection in patients with rectal cancer aged ≥80 y. Methods: From 2007-2015, a total of 84 consecutive patients with rectal cancer from a single institution were included, 45 patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection were compared with 39 patients undergoing open rectal resection. Results: The two groups were well balanced in terms of age, gender, body mass index, American society of anesthesiologists scores, previous abdominal surgery, neoadjuvant therapy, tumor stage, distance of tumor from the anal verge, and comorbidities. One (2.2%) patient in the laparoscopic group required conversion to open surgery. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly longer operating time (160.1±28.2 versus 148.2±41.3 min; P=0.031), less intraoperative blood loss (80.5±20.9 versus 160.3±42.4 mL; P=0.002), less need of blood transfusion (6.7% versus 20.5%; P=0.003), a shorter time to diet recovery (2.5±1.5 versus 4.9±1.1; P=0.015) and postoperative hospital stay (7.5±4.5 versus 10.8±4.2; P=0.035), lower overall postoperative complication rate (8.9% versus 20.5%; P=0.017), and wound-related complication rate (4.4% versus 10.2%; P=0.013) when compared with open surgery. Specimen length, no. of retrieced lymph nodes, positive distal and circumferential margin rate, mortality rate, and reoperation rate were not significantly different between two groups. The disease-free and overall 5-year survival rates were similar between two groups.Conclusions: Laparoscopic rectal surgery is safe and feasible in patients aged≥80 y and is associated with similar long-term oncologic outcomes when compared with open surgery.     

手辅助腹腔镜与全腹腔镜治疗低位直肠癌早期临床疗效分析

摘 要：［目的］ 探讨手辅助腹腔镜手术（hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery,HALS）与全腹腔镜手术（laparoscopic surgery,LAP）治疗低位直肠癌的早期临床疗效差异。［方法］ 分析2012年4月至2016年12月在杭州市第三人民医院接受手辅助腹腔镜及全腹腔镜手术治疗的78例低位直肠癌患者资料,其中HALS 组40例,LAP组 38例,回顾性分析两种手术方式在手术时间、中转开腹率、淋巴结清扫数目、术后住院时间、住院费用、术后炎症反应等方面的差异。［结果］ HALS组平均手术时间为142.37min,显著低于LAP组的167.06min（P＜0.01）;LAP组术后CRP升高水平为52.29±29.19mg/L,显著低于HALS组的76.62±36.25 mg/L（P＜0.01）;两组在切除标本长度、全直肠系膜切除率、中转开腹率、淋巴结清扫数目、术后并发症发生率、术后住院时间及住院费用方面差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。［结论］ 手辅助腹腔镜和全腹腔镜治疗低位直肠癌具有相似的安全性和住院花费,且手辅助腹腔镜手术时间及学习曲线相对较短,但术后炎症反应较全腹腔镜手术明显。     

老年直肠癌患者腹腔镜根治术与开腹根治术比较

[目的]探讨应用腹腔镜技术治疗老年直肠癌患者的可行性和近期临床疗效.[方法]比较2004年1月至2005年4月,20例行腹腔镜手术的老年直肠癌患者(A组),与30例行开腹根治术的老年直肠癌患者(B组)围手术期的临床资料.[结果]两组术中失血量(A＜B)、手术后胃肠功能和排尿功能恢复时间及住院时间(A＜B),手术时间和住院费用(A＞B)均有显著差异(P＜0.05).两组清扫淋巴结数量无差异(P＞0.05).[结论]腹腔镜根治术和开腹根治术治疗老年直肠癌患者在技术上同样安全可靠.腹腔镜技术更具有创伤小、围手术期出血少、手术后恢复快等突出优点,因而对于老年直肠癌患者可能有更好的应用前景.     

不同体质指数直肠癌患者行腹腔镜手术的疗效及预后分析

目的：探讨直肠癌患者的体质指数对其行腹腔镜直肠癌手术的疗效与预后的影响。方法分析98例行腹腔镜直肠癌手术患者的临床资料，将体质指数≤25 kg／m2作为正常组，将体质指数＞25 kg／m2作为肥胖组，对比2组的一般资料，术前病情、术中情况、术后预后情况，并发症发生情况以及随访生存状况。结果2组患者术前资料除了体质指数有显著差异外，其余均无显著性差异。2组患者的切除肠段长度、肛门排气时间、住院时间均无统计学差异（P＞0．05），但肥胖组的手术时间和术中出血量均显著多于正常组[（252．3±16．2） min vs （203．2±18．2） min；（118．3±44．1）mL vs （103．4±24．1）mL]。2组患者发生术后并发症的差异无统计学意义（χ2＝0．441，P＝0．506）。98例患者获得4～52个月的随访，无一失访。患者中位生存时间为27个月，其中正常组2年无病生存率为97．1％，3年无病生存率为89．7％；肥胖组2年无病生存率为93．3％，3年无病生存率为76．7％，Log-Rank趋势检验发现2组的无病生存曲线差异无统计学意义。结论直肠癌肥胖患者行腹腔镜辅助直肠癌根治术是安全的，疗效显著，不影响术后生存情况。     

肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌手术结果的影响

目的探讨肥胖对直肠癌腹腔镜手术可行性、安全性和远期生存结果的影响。方法回顾性分析2007年10月-2009年12月间收治的147例腹腔镜直肠癌手术治疗患者的临床资料。根据international obesity task Force(IOTF)的标准将患者分为三组：非肥胖组(body mass index,BMI＜25.0 kg/m2)101例、超重组(BMI 25.0~29.9 kg/m2)37例和肥胖组(BMI≥30.0 kg/m2)9例。对三组患者的人口学特征、临床资料、手术结果和长期生存进行对比分析。结果三组间性别、年龄、ASA分级、手术方式、肿瘤大小和肿瘤下缘距肛缘距离无差异,超重组和肥胖组患者的合并症多于非肥胖组(P=0.036)。非肥胖组、超重组和肥胖组的手术时间、术后并发症、术后排气时间、术后住院时间无差异、淋巴结清扫数目和腹腔镜直肠癌前切除或低位前切除术的下切缘距离三组间无差异。中转开腹率非肥胖组、超重组和肥胖组分别为4.0%、13.5%和0(P=0.112)。非肥胖组、超重组和肥胖组的3年无瘤生存率分别为78.5%、55.7%和100%,差异无统计学意义(Log rank值=0.993,P=0.319)。结论超重和肥胖患者直肠癌腹腔镜手术安全可行,不影响远期生存结果。     

腹腔镜直肠癌根治手术的技术改进

文章主要阐述腹腔镜直肠癌根治手术的技术改进,分别从适应证的变化、血管根部的处理、无瘤化原则、盆底腹膜的关闭及标本取出的改进进行了详细探讨。     

腹腔镜直肠癌根治手术65例分析

[目的]探讨腹腔镜直肠癌全直肠系膜切除（TME）手术几个值得注意的问题。[方法]回顾性分析腹腔镜直肠癌TME手术65例。[结果]65例按TME原则采用腹腔镜完成直肠癌手术．Dixon手术58．5％（38／65），Miles手术30．8％（20／651，Parks手术10．8％（7／65）。手术时间130-300min．平均175min，术中平均出血量120ml。本组无吻合口瘘，无围手术期死亡病例。术后1～4d肠道功能恢复。[结论]腹腔镜直肠癌TME手术安全可行，术中应根据病情选择肠系膜下动脉切断位置、盆腔自主神经保留以及是否行保护性回肠造口。     

腹腔镜直肠癌根治手术65例分析

[目的]探讨腹腔镜直肠癌全直肠系膜切除（TME）手术几个值得注意的问题。[方法]回顾性分析腹腔镜直肠癌TME手术65例。[结果]65例按TME原则采用腹腔镜完成直肠癌手术．Dixon手术58．5％（38／65），Miles手术30．8％（20／651，Parks手术10．8％（7／65）。手术时间130-300min．平均175min，术中平均出血量120ml。本组无吻合口瘘，无围手术期死亡病例。术后1～4d肠道功能恢复。[结论]腹腔镜直肠癌TME手术安全可行，术中应根据病情选择肠系膜下动脉切断位置、盆腔自主神经保留以及是否行保护性回肠造口。     

腹腔镜直肠癌手术的现状及前景展望

0引言从1991年实施首例腹腔镜结肠手术后,腹腔镜结直肠手术在全世界范围内引起了广泛的关注。随机对照研究已证实腹腔镜手术和开腹手术在结肠癌中的远期疗效相当,近期疗效明显优于开腹手术[1],使结直肠癌患者大受裨益。但是腹腔镜直肠癌手术在狭窄的骨盆中进行分离、横断和吻合等操作,技术     

腹腔镜直肠癌根治术的现状和争论

文章就腹腔镜直肠癌根治术与开腹手术比较的优势、其可行性和有效性,穿刺孔种植转移等问题进行探讨。     

外科医师手术量对直肠癌患者并发症与预后的影响

0引言直肠癌是消化道常见恶性肿瘤,发病率在我国呈上升趋势。直肠癌保肛手术率、局部复发率与生存率是文献中常用的评价患者预后指标。随着研究逐步深入,外科医师在直肠癌患者预后中的作用逐步显现出来,其中外科医师手术量对于患者并发症以及预后     

腔镜直肠癌手术应遵循的有关原则

文章论述了腔镜直肠癌手术治疗应遵循的基本原则,包括安全性、根治性和功能性原则等的有关问题.     

不同手术入路的腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的疗效及安全性

目的探讨不同手术入路的腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的疗效及安全性。方法选择接受腹腔镜手术治疗的156例直肠癌患者作为研究对象,根据入院先后顺序,采用随机数字表法分为A组和B组,各78例。A组采用头侧中间入路,B组采用传统中间入路。比较2组术后病理TNM分期、组织学分化程度,记录术中和术后主要结局指标,淋巴结清扫结果及手术相关并发症发生情况,随访12个月,观察术后生存、肿瘤复发或转移情况。结果所有患者均顺利完成手术,未见中转开腹病例,手术切缘均为阴性。在A组和B组中分别有2例(2.56%)、3例(3.85%)患者第253组淋巴结病理学检查结果显示肿瘤学阳性,2组术后病理TNM分期及组织学分化程度比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、住院时间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);A组手术时间明显短于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2组淋巴结清扫数目比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);A组清扫肠系膜下动脉(IMA)周围淋巴结时间明显短于B组,第253组淋巴结清扫数目明显多于B组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。所有患者均获得随访,未见肿瘤相关死亡、复发或转移病例;2组手术相关并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论头侧中间入路的腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌可获得与传统中间入路相当的近期疗效,安全性可靠,在手术视野暴露、进入正确解剖间隙和清扫第253组淋巴结上具有优势,值得进一步研究应用。     

减孔腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的近期与远期疗效观察

目的探讨减孔腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的近期与远期疗效。方法选择80例直肠癌患者,根据随机数字表法,将其分为观察组及对照组,每组40例。对照组给予常规腹腔镜直肠癌根治术,观察组给予减孔(2孔)的腹腔镜直肠癌根治术,对比2组患者的围术期指标、病理学指标、2组中转开腹比例、术后1个月并发症发生率及术后3年无病存活率。结果观察组的手术时间明显较对照组长,但术中出血量、切口长度、肛门排气时间、下床活动时间、住院时间均明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。肿瘤距肛门距离、远切缘距肿瘤下缘距离、淋巴结清扫数目对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组中转开腹及术后并发症发生率对比,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组术后3年无病存活率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论减孔腹腔镜手术与常规腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌的近远期疗效相当,但减孔腹腔镜手术可缩短患者的术后恢复时间,具有一定优势。     

腹腔镜下直肠癌根治术中的应用技术分析

手术切除病变修复脏器的过程实际是与出血作斗争的过程。借助优良的手术器械,在腹腔镜下直肠癌根治手术中能实现清晰无血的手术视野。精细的手术操作,准确地把握解剖层次是实施腹腔镜直肠癌根治手术无血术野的技术保证。文章主要对以上问题进行探讨与分析。     

The Feasibility and Role of Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer

The use of the laparoscopic approach for the treatment of rectal tumors remains controversial. This review summarizes all the published level 1 and some level 2 evidence, much of which is not included in recent meta-analyses. The current evidence base demonstrates short-term benefits in the laparoscopic group without compromising 3–5 year survival or recurrence. Quality-of-life indices demonstrate benefits until 1 year but not beyond. Further randomized clinical trials are required to investigate the impact on lymph node yield and genitourinary function, and a minimum dataset might be helpful for the design of future studies. We conclude that the laparoscopic approach is both feasible and desirable in the context of a well-trained surgeon and has a clear role in the management rectal cancer in all but emergent and T4 cases.     

Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Non-Metastatic Rectal Cancer

Background: Rectal cancer is a pervasive type of malignancy that accounts for one-third of colorectal cancers worldwide. Several studies have assessed the use of laparoscopic surgery as a treatment option. However, there is an ongoing debate regarding its oncological safety. Methods: This retrospective study included 270 patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer who underwent either laparoscopic resection (LR, n = 93) or open resection (OR, n = 177) in an academic medical center. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), whereas the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. We performed propensity score analyses and compared outcomes. Univariate survival analyses using Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox proportional hazard regression models were also conducted. Results: In the propensity score matching analyses, 93 LR- and 93 OR-matched patients were compared. The overall median follow-up time was 3.95 years (range, 1.98‒5.55 years). The 3-year OS was similar between the groups (LR 79.1% vs OR 79.2%, p = 0.82). Meanwhile, the DFS rate was also comparable between the groups (LR 77.8% vs OR 73.2%, p = 0.53). No significant differences in operative blood loss or hospital stay between the groups were observed (150 vs 150 mL, p = 0.74; 9 vs 10 days, p = 0.077, respectively). Also, no difference was found in postoperative complications between the groups (p = 0.23). However, LR was associated with a longer operative time than OR (455 vs 356 min, p < 0.001) and the number of lymph nodes harvested in LR was slightly fewer than OR (10 vs 11, p = 0.045). Conclusion: LR of rectal cancer is safe, feasible, and comparable to standard OR in terms of the oncologic outcomes. However, LR required longer operative times. A well-designed prospective study with a large number of participants and long follow-up period is needed to show significant differences between the two groups.     

腹腔镜直肠癌根治术和开腹手术直肠癌根治术的疗效及对患者胃肠功能影响的比较

目的 对比分析腹腔镜和传统开腹手术对直肠癌根治术患者的疗效及对胃肠功能的影响.方法 12例患者分为2组,腹腔镜直肠癌根治术组(LAP组)和开腹直肠癌根治术组(OP组),每组60例.对比分析2组患者手术指标,血清胃动素和胃泌素含量及并发症等情况.结果 LAP组与OP组相比,手术时间无差异性,但术中出血量、淋巴结清扫个数、术后进食时间、术后吗啡用量、术后镇痛时间及术后住院时间有差异性(P<0.05);腹胀排气时间、肛门排气时间、血清中胃动素和胃泌素有差异性(P<0.05);并发症发生率也有差异性(P<0.05).结论 腹腔镜直肠癌根治术可以减小手术创伤,加快恢复胃肠道功能,可能与提高胃动素和胃泌素的分泌有关.     

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗老年直肠癌的短期生命质量比较

  目的  探讨腹腔镜手术治疗老年直肠癌的短期生命质量。  方法  收集2009年9月至2011年5月中国医科大学附属盛京医院结直肠肛门病外科年龄70岁以上直肠癌患者资料, 依据调查表及生命质量测定核心量表(QLQ-C30)中文第三版, 共收集132例完整资料, 分为腔镜组(LR组)54例, 开腹组(OR组)78例, 两组进行统计学比较。  结果  两组均无死亡病例。LR组患者排气、进食、镇痛药使用、SIRS持续的时间及术后住院时间明显低于OR组(P < 0.01), LR组留置尿管时间及切口感染少于OR组(P < 0.05)、两组肿瘤下切缘距离、吻合口瘘、肠梗阻、尿潴留、术后转移率及无进展生存期比较差异均无统计学意义(P均 > 0.05)。术后2周在5个功能领域、1个症状领域(疼痛)、1个总体健康状况领域和4个单一领域(气促、食欲丧失、失眠、经济困难)对比, LR组优于OR组(P < 0.05)。4周后认知功能、疼痛、气促、食欲丧失、失眠领域比较, LR组与OR组比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。  结论  腹腔镜直肠癌根治术使老年患者短期生命质量得到显著改善。