手术机器人系统直肠癌切除术——经肛门拖出标本及手术机器人行吻合重建

目的总结对直肠癌施行经肛门拖出标本及达芬奇手术机器人系统下进行直肠重建的临床经验。方法回顾性分析2012年2-5月间15例在南京军区南京总医院接受机器人系统施行直肠癌根治术患者的临床资料。结果15例患者中男9例．女6例,年龄（61．5±9．2）岁。所有病例均顺利完成机器人手术．手术时间（154．7±10．6）min,术中出血量（17．3±6．5）ml,术后肛门排气时间（2.3±0．8）d．术后住院时间（3．3±0．6）d。标本内获取的淋巴结（15．0±1．2）枚／例,切缘均为阴性。术后所有患者均接受了4-8周的随访．无术后感染、吻合口瘘及切口疝等并发症,无近期死亡病例。结论达芬奇手术机器人系统以其独特的光源系统及灵活的器械操作．极大地降低了直肠癌手术的难度。     

手术机器人系统在120例胃癌患者治疗中的应用

目的总结应用达芬奇手术机器人系统治疗胃癌的经验,并探讨其安全性及有效性。方法2010年5月至2012年4月间．应用达芬奇手术机器人系统治疗胃癌患者共计120例。综合分析这组患者的手术及近期康复结果。结果120例患者中男74例,女46例;平均年龄58．5（22-80）岁。其中远端胃次全切除62例,全胃切除35例。近端胃次全切除23例：其中55例患者采用了腹部辅助小切口完成消化道重建：65例在机器人系统下完成消化道重建。中转开腹1例（0．9％）。手术时间（245±50）min,其中装机时间（17±5）min。术中出血量（70±45）ml,获取淋巴结数为（22．5±10．7）枚／例;切除标本切缘均阴性。术后病理分期：ⅠB期24例,Ⅱ期28例,ⅢA期47例,ⅢB期21例。术后并发症发生率为5％（6／120）,分别为十二指肠残端瘘1例。食管残胃吻合口瘘2例,术后肠梗阻1例,残胃排空障碍1例和术后出血1例：通过手术或保守治疗均获得治愈。无围手术期死亡者。术后住院时间（6．3±2．6）d。结论达芬奇手术机器人系统应用于胃癌手术创伤小、出血少并安全有效。在淋巴结清扫及消化道吻合重建方面更具有独特的优越性。     

腹腔镜辅助右半结肠切除术16例临床分析

为探讨腹腔镜辅助右半结肠切除术的安全性和疗效,对16例行腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌切除手术患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果显示,顺利完成腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌根治术14例,中转开腹2例,中转率为12．5％。无死亡病例。平均手术时间为（175±15）min,平均术中出血量为（120±9）ml,平均结肠癌切除标本上下切缘长度分别为（10．8±0．8）cm和（10．2±0．7）cm,平均清除淋巴结（16．1±1．2）枚,平均术后住院时间为（10±1）d。1例术后第3天肺部感染,1例切口感染。14例完成腹腔镜手术患者随访6～20个月,1例发生肝转移。结果表明,腹腔镜辅助右半结肠切除术安全性好,可达到与开腹手术同样的根治效果。     

达芬奇机器人手术系统应用于直肠癌根治术101例的近期疗效观察

目的探讨达芬奇机器人手术系统应用于直肠癌根治术的可行性及安全性,总结其临床应用经验及近期疗效。方法回顾性分析第三军医大学西南医院2010年3月至2012年9月行达芬奇机器人手术系统直肠癌根治术101例患者的临床资料。对其手术情况、并发症发生情况和术后恢复情况及病理性资料进行分析评估。结果101例患者均顺利完成达芬奇机器人手术系统直肠癌根治术,无中转开腹者。采用低位前切除术式（Dixon）73例,经腹会阴联合切除术式（Miles）28例。手术时间（210．3±47．2）min,术中出血量（60．5±28．7）ml。淋巴结清扫（17．3±5．4）枚。术后患者排气时间（2．7±0．7）d。病理提示远切缘距肿瘤（5．3±2．3）cm,无癌细胞残留。术后并发症发生率为6．9％（7／101）,其中吻合口瘘2例,会阴部切口感染2例,肺部感染2例,尿潴留1例。无死亡病例。全组患者随访时间（12．9±8．0）月,有2例（2．0％）发生远处转移,无局部复发。结论达芬奇机器人手术系统应用于直肠癌根治术安全、创伤小、恢复快,近期疗效满意。     

手辅助腹腔镜在结直肠肿瘤手术中的应用

目的探讨手辅助腹腔镜技术（HALS）在结直肠肿瘤手术中的安全性和有效性。方法回顾性分析接受HALS治疗的70例结直肠癌患者的临床资料。结果70例患者中男性38例．女性32例．中位年龄61岁。乙状结肠腺瘤4例,乙状结肠癌48例,降结肠癌3例,升结肠癌1例．直肠癌13例,全结肠切除1例。所有患者均顺利完成HALS,无中转开腹病例。手术时间为（126．0±22．5）min：术中出血（75．0±18．8）ml;平均清扫淋巴结（16．8±4．2）枚,术后平均住院9．4d。无围手术期死亡病例,术后1例患者出现吻合口狭窄,2例吻合口瘘,均经保守治疗好转。结论HALS用于结肠癌手术创伤小、易掌握、安全性高,具有良好应用前景。     

左半结肠癌致急性肠梗阻Ⅰ期手术术式探讨

目的比较左半结肠癌致急性肠梗阻Ⅰ期根治性切除肠吻合手术时两种不同切除方法的疗效。方法58例左半结肠癌致急性肠梗阻患者行结肠次全切除术30例,左半结肠切除术28例。结果结肠次全切除和左半结肠切除患者手术时间分别为（150.0±21.4）min和（201.0±30.2）min,并发症发生率分别为16.7%和50.0%,住院病死率分别为0%和17.9%,两组比较均有统计学差异（P〈0.05）。结肠次全切除患者术后均有腹泻,左半结肠切除患者术后腹泻10例,分别于3个月和1月内大便基本成形。结肠次全切除和左半结肠切除5年生存率分别为37.0%和32.0%,两组比较无统计学差异（P〉0.05）。结论梗阻性左半结肠癌Ⅰ期根治性切除肠吻合手术方式中,结肠次全切除术明显优于左半结肠切除术,建议在合适的病例中推广应用。     

外科手术对顽固性便秘并继发性巨结肠的疗效研究

目的：探讨不同手术方式治疗顽固性便秘并继发性巨结肠的疗效。方法回顾性分析2007年6月至2013年1月在南京军区南京总医院全军普通外科研究所接受手术治疗的112例顽固性便秘并发继发性巨结肠患者的临床资料,全组患者便秘病程4～22年,其中74例既往接受过腹部中等以上手术。手术方式：（1）金陵术（结肠次全切除加升结肠-直肠后壁侧侧吻合术）81例,其中24例接受腹腔镜辅助金陵术,18例加末端回肠保护性造口术;（2）结肠全切除加末端回肠与直肠后壁侧侧吻合术18例;（3）结肠全切除加末端回肠临时造口术13例（6个月后行末端回肠与直肠后壁侧侧吻合术）。末端回肠保护性造口在术后6个月予以还纳。结果112例患者手术成功率100％,无手术相关死亡病例。术后出现的并发症包括术后早期腹泻90例（80．4％）、肛门疼痛和排粪不尽22例（19．6％）、尿潴留（去除导尿管后24～48 h内出现）16例（14．2％）、吻合口出血9例（8．0％）、吻合口瘘6例（5．4％）以及肠梗阻15例（13．4％）,除6例肠梗阻患者接受肠粘连松解术后症状缓解外,其余并发症均通过保守治疗恢复良好。术后随访6月,不同术式患者Wexner便秘平均评分为5．8～8．3,与术前21．4～28．7比较,明显改善（P＜0．01）。结论顽固性便秘并继发性巨结肠外科手术治疗效果良好。     

完全腹腔镜结肠切除术的手工缝合重建

目的探讨完全腹腔镜结肠切除术中手工缝合重建的安全性与可行性。方法总结分析西京消化病医院结肠良性疾病（良性局部病变5例）和结肠癌（升结肠癌4例、横结肠癌2例和乙状结肠癌8例）共计19例连续病例应用手工缝合技术进行完全腹腔镜下肠道缝合重建的临床资料。所有患者均由同一组腹腔镜外科医生主刀完成手术．包括完全腹腔镜下结肠病灶局部切除手工肠道重建．右半结肠切除后回肠末端横结肠手工吻合及结肠的手工荷包缝合。结果完全腹腔镜结肠切除重建时．镜下手T缝合肠道重建11例．近端手工荷包缝合后环形吻合器吻合8例。镜下手工吻合时间为（49．5±29．4）min,荷包缝合时间为（13．3±5．5）min。术后未观察到吻合相关并发症。1例横结肠脂肪瘤患者术后发生轻度腹腔感染,经保守治疗后治愈。结论完全腹腔镜结肠切除术中手工缝合重建安全、可行;但需由经验丰富的腹腔镜外科医生实施。     

手术机器人系统与腹腔镜辅助胃癌切除术的临床疗效对比

目的对比分析达芬奇手术机器人系统与腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2009年1月至2011年12月南京军区南京总医院普通外科实施胃癌手术患者的临床资料。其中达芬奇手术机器人系统进行胃癌手术97例（机器人组）,腹腔镜辅助胃癌手术70例（腹腔镜组）．对比分析两组患者的手术指标、病理指标及短期疗效指标。结果两组患者手术均顺利完成,无中转开腹病例。与腹腔镜组相比,机器人组患者术中出血量少[（80．8±53．1）比（153．7±26．4）ml,P=0．001]、淋巴结清扫数量多[（23．1±5．4）比（20．0±4．3）枚／例,P=0．001]、手术时间长[（272．3±46．1）比（240．3±89．1）min,P=0．003]、术后进食半流质时间早[（3．2±0．8）比（3．6±1．2）d,P=0．002]及住院时间短[（6．1±2．6）比（6．9±2．3）d,P=0．037],差异均有统计学意义。两组患者近端切缘长度、远端切缘长度、术后下床时间、通气时间及术后并发症发生率的比较,差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0．05）。结论达芬奇机器人系统辅助胃癌手术安全可行,具有术中出血少、淋巴结清扫数多和术后康复快等优点．可取得与腹腔镜手术相同的肿瘤根治效果。     

机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剥除术临床分析

目的探讨达芬奇机器人手术系统辅助腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剥除手术的安全性与可行性。方法回顾性总结2012年12月至2013年10月实施的16例达芬奇机器人辅助子宫肌瘤剥除手术的治疗效果。结果16例患者手术均顺利完成,无中转开腹。手术时间（170．0±45.3）min,术中失血量（196．9±186．9）ml,术后肠蠕动恢复时间为（45．1±8．2）h,术后住院时间（4．2±1．5）d,除1例术后出现尿潴留,留置尿管3d后恢复排尿功能外,未出现出血、感染等并发症。结论达芬奇机器人手术系统应用于子宫肌瘤剥除手术安全可行。     

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Colectomy: Cost and Clinical Outcomes

Background and Objectives:

Laparoscopic colectomies, with and without robotic assistance, are performed to treat both benign and malignant colonic disease. This study compared clinical and economic outcomes for laparoscopic colectomy procedures with and without robotic assistance.

Methods:

Patients aged ≥18 years having primary inpatient laparoscopic colectomy procedures (cecectomy, right hemicolectomy, left hemicolectomy, and sigmoidectomy) identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition procedure codes performed between 2009 and the second quarter of 2011 from the Premier Hospital Database were studied. Patients were matched to a control cohort using propensity scores for disease, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics and were matched 1:1 for specific colectomy procedure. The outcomes of interest were hospital cost of laparoscopic robotic-assisted colectomy compared with traditional laparoscopic colectomy, surgery time, adverse events, and length of stay.

Results:

Of 25 758 laparoscopic colectomies identified, 98% were performed without robotic assistance and 2% were performed with robotic assistance. After matching, 1066 patients remained, 533 in each group. Lengths of stay were not significantly different between the matched cohorts, nor were rates of major, minor, and/or surgical complications. Inpatient procedures with robotic assistance were significantly more costly than those without robotic assistance ($17 445 vs $15 448, P = .001). Operative times were significantly longer for robotic-assisted procedures (4.37 hours vs 3.34 hours, P < .001).

Conclusion:

Segmental colectomies can be performed safely by either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted methods. Increased per-case hospital costs for robotic-assisted procedures and prolonged operative times suggest that further investigation is warranted when considering robotic technology for routine laparoscopic colectomies.     

结肠内支架联合腹腔镜结肠癌根治术在结肠癌合并急性梗阻中的短期及中期疗效分析

目的:探讨结肠腔内支架置入联合腹腔镜下结肠癌根治术治疗结肠癌合并急性梗阻的短期及中期疗效。方法:选取2010年4月至2013年6月成功接受结肠腔内支架置入后行腹腔镜下结肠癌根治术的56例结肠癌合并急性梗阻患者(治疗组);另检索62例同期接受急诊开腹结肠癌根治术的结肠癌并急性梗阻患者作为对照(对照组)。对比两组患者的短期疗效指标及中期肿瘤学生存指标。结果:与对照组相比,治疗组术中出血量减少[(55.2±31.0)ml vs.(113.6±73.0)ml],淋巴结清扫数量增加[(20.0±5.1)vs.(15.4±5.2)],术后住院时间缩短[(7.3±2.1)d vs.(11.6±3.2)d],造口率(8.9%vs.67.7%)、术后吻合口漏发生率(2.0%vs.15.0%)、切口感染率(3.6%vs.16.1%)均降低,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者3年局部复发率(17.9%vs.19.4%)、3年无病生存率(64.3%vs.62.9%)、3年总体生存率(78.6%vs.75.8%)差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:结肠内支架联合腹腔镜下结肠癌根治术治疗结肠癌合并急性梗阻具有良好的短期及中期疗效。     

Superior lymph node resection is achievable with laparoscopic colectomy: even in initial 30 cases

Recent studies demonstrated the validity of the laparoscopic technique in colon cancer resection. Recent node resection data for open colectomies show inadequate nodal removal is common. In this study, two experienced laparoscopic surgeons evaluated their initial outcomes with laparoscopic colectomy, including resections for malignancies. This retrospective review of clinic and hospital records involved 69 consecutive patients subjected to laparoscopic colectomies from July 2000 through December 2005. Outcomes were compared with 1000 patients from Senagore and Delaney. Adequacy of oncologic resection was compared with the published National Cancer Institute database. Sixty-nine resections were performed. Overall complication and conversion rates were comparable to Senagore and Delaney except for days of hospitalization at 6.0 compared with 3.7 (P < 0.01) and readmission of 4.2 per cent compared with 9.1 per cent (P < 0.01). Adequate node resection occurred in 26 of 32 patients (81%) compared with 37 per cent of open colectomies in the National Cancer Institute nationwide database (P < 0.05). The overall median number of nodes resected was 18. For veteran laparoscopic surgeons in a community hospital, the initial experience with laparoscopic colectomy can provide excellent results, meeting standards set in large published series. In addition, the resection of nodes in colon cancer can be significantly better when performed laparoscopically or by hand-assisted laparoscopy.     

Laparoscopic colon resections: a five-year retrospective review

In recent years, laparoscopic surgery has become a matter of growing interest. It has been shown that laparoscopic colectomy is well tolerated and safe for benign disease. However, there is some uncertainty about using this method for malignant disease when curative resection is the aim. These uncertainties mainly consist of spread of cancer to port site, long-term survival, and adequacy of resection. The majority of laparoscopic colectomies are technically assisted procedures in which anastomosis is performed outside the abdomen. However, some surgeons are now performing this surgery totally laparoscopically with the anastomosis performed inside the abdomen. Laparoscopic colectomy is currently practiced with great frequency by general surgeons. Its performance requires a steep learning curve and a large number of cases to obtain proficiency. The indications for laparoscopic colectomy are different from one institution to another. In some institutions all patients with colorectal disease are candidates for laparoscopic colectomy and in others it may be limited to benign disease only. The purpose of this review is to analyze all laparoscopic colectomies performed at our medical center since 1992. We conducted a retrospective chart review of both hospital and clinic charts of patients who underwent colectomies at our hospital. A total of 338 patient charts were reviewed. In a comparison of both laparoscopic (n = 285) and converted (n = 53) methods, the age and operative time were about the same. Age average and operating room time average were similar for both groups. With laparoscopy, there was a 3-day drop in length of hospital stay as well as a 1-day-earlier regaining of bowel function. Hospital cost dropped 5000 dollars average for the laparoscopic colectomy. The conversion rate at our center was 15 per cent. Complication rates were lower in the laparoscopic group. Recurrence of cancer at the port site (0.7%) was no higher than in the converted group (incisional recurrence, 1.8%). We conclude that laparoscopic colectomy does show an improvement in return of bowel function, hospital cost, and shorter hospital stay. Long-term follow-up will be necessary to determine the effectiveness of laparoscopic colon resection for colorectal cancer.     

Laparoscopic colectomy for colon adenocarcinoma: an 11-year retrospective review with 5-year survival rates

Background Laparoscopic colectomy for the management of colon cancer remains a controversial therapeutic option, especially when the outcomes are compared with the historically accepted survival data and recurrence rates after open surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates after laparoscopic colon resection for invasive colon adenocarcinoma.Methods A total of 129 patients underwent consecutive laparoscopic colectomies for colon adenocarcinoma (between April 1992 and 2004 January) by a single surgeon at a single institution. Records were analyzed retrospectively and follow-up data was obtained. The Student t-test, Cox regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier survival data were used for statistical analysis.Results After patients with noninvasive disease on final pathology were excluded, the study population comprised 88 patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomies for invasive colon cancer with > 2 years of follow-up. Of these cases, 81 (93%) were amenable for complete follow-up at 11years (41 women and 40 men; mean age, 76 years). Mean follow-up was 61 months. There was one perioperative death (1.2%), and the overall postoperative morbidity rate was 13.6%. The average number of lymph nodes harvested was 10.1 (±6). There were no port site recurrences. The Kaplan-Meier survival data were as follows for 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival, respectively stage I (n = 34) 89% and 89%; stage II (n = 22), 65% and 59%; stage III (n = 19), 72% and 67%; stages I–III combined, (n = 75), 77% and 73%.Conclusions For this specific cohort of patients undergoing curative laparoscopic colectomies for invasive colon adenocarcinoma, the mean follow-up was > 5 years. Overall survival and disease-free survival for stage I, II, and III colon cancer as well as for stages I–III combined are favorable and comparable to historically acceptable open colectomy survival rates. Overall survival and disease-free survival after laparoscopic colectomy for invasive colon cancer is no worse, and perhaps better than, the previously reported rates for the same procedure done by an open technique.     

Port site metastases and recurrence after laparoscopic colectomy

Background: This study was performed to prospectively assess the impact of the laparoscopic approach to the patterns of port site metastases (PSM) and recurrence rate (RR) of resected colon carcinomas as compared with conventional colectomies. Methods: All patients were included in a prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) versus open colectomy (OC) for colon cancer. The randomization was stratified for localization of the lesion. Patients with metastasic disease at the time of the surgery were excluded. Follow-up in the outpatient clinic was done every 3 months for a minimum of 12 months. Endpoints for the study were metastasis at port site and laparotomy incision as well as recurrence rate. Results: Of 91 segmental colectomies performed from November 1993 to January 1996, there were 44 LAC and 47 OC. Patient data were similar in both groups (age, sex, Dukes stage, type of operation). Mean follow-up was 21.4 months, with a range of 13 to 41 months. There were no wounds or PSM in those series. RR was similar for both groups. For LAC, it was five of 31 (16.1%); for OC, it was six of 40 (15%). Conclusions: The laparoscopic approach has a recurrence rate similar to that for open procedures for colon cancer. However, additional follow-up of these patients is needed before we can determine whether or not the laparoscopic approach influences overall survival.     

Telerobotic surgery for right and sigmoid colectomies: 30 consecutive cases

Background This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using a robotic assistant for colon resections. This report describes the experience, advantages, and disadvantages of using the DaVinci system for a colectomy on the basis of 30 consecutive cases managed by a minimally invasive surgery fellowship–trained surgeon. Methods Data were prospectively collected on 30 consecutive colectomies performed using the DaVinci system from September 2002 to March 2005. Results A total of 13 sigmoid colectomies with splenic flexure mobilization and 17 right colectomies were performed for 14 men and 16 women. The preoperative diagnoses for the procedures were cancer (n = 5), diverticulitis (n = 8), polyps (n = 16), and carcinoid (n = 1). The right colectomies required 29.7 ± 6.7 min (range, 22–44 min) for the port setup, 177.1 ± 50.6 min (range, 103–306 min) for the robot, and 218.9 ± 44.6 min (range, 167–340 min) for the total case. The length of stay was 5.2 ± 5.8 days (range, 2–27 days). The robot portion was 80.9% of the total case time. The sigmoid colectomies required 30.1 ± 9.6 min (range, 15–50 min) for the port setup, 103.2 ± 29.4 min (range, 69–165 min) for the robot, and 225.2 ± 37.1 min (range, 147–283 min) for the total case. The hospital length of stay was 6.0 ± 7.3 days (range, 3–30 days). The robot portion was 45.8% of the total case time. Six complications occurred: left hip paresthesia, cecal injury, anastomotic leak, patient slipped from the operating table after the robotic portion of the case, transverse colon injury, and return of a patient to the office with urinary retention. Two sigmoid colectomies were converted to laparotomy. The specific advantages and disadvantages of using the DaVinci system for colectomies are discussed. Conclusions The 30 consecutive cases demonstrated the technical feasibility of using the DaVinci system for a colectomy. The longevity of the DaVinci system’s use for colectomy will be determined by comparison of its cost and outcomes with those for conventional laparoscopic colectomy.     

中间入路法腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术50例临床分析

目的:总结中间入路法腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术的手术经验及应用价值。方法:回顾分析2008年1月至2010年6月利用中间入路法行50例腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术的临床资料及短期随访结果。结果:手术时间平均(165±35)min,术中出血量平均(140±61)ml,平均清扫淋巴结(13.0±3.7)枚,17例区域淋巴结阳性,平均切除肠管(18.2±8.0)cm。术后随访12～36个月,肿瘤相关死亡1例,1例局部复发。无切口种植、吻合口出血、吻合口漏等并发症发生。结论:中间入路法腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治术路径明确,解剖层面清晰,易掌握。中间入路法先结扎肿瘤血管,符合肿瘤根治原则,是腹腔镜辅助结肠癌根治手术的最佳路径。     

腹腔镜下治疗直肠癌同时伴右半结肠癌手术体会

目的探讨腹腔镜下同时行右半结肠癌与直肠癌手术治疗的可行性。方法对13例右半结肠癌与直肠癌并存的患者,采用腹腔镜下同时手术。13例患者中3例进行腹腔镜下全大肠切除,回肠J型储袋肛管吻合术,10例行Ⅰ期行右半结肠根治术联合直肠癌根治术(CME)。CME原则均行D3手术,直肠手术遵循全直肠系膜切除术原则。行直肠前切除9例,经腹会阴联合直肠癌根治术1例。中转开腹1例。结果术前肠镜探查符合率69.23%(9/13),腹腔镜手术探查发现4例。12例Ⅰ期愈合,无切口感染,无吻合口瘘,无肠黏连肠梗阻。手术后中位进流食时间1~3天,进食固体食物的时间6~9天,手术后平均住院时间(8.7±0.8)天。9例完成3年随访,7例无瘤存活。结论对于同时伴有右半结肠癌和直肠癌的患者,腹腔镜是一种比较好的探查和手术根治方式,Ⅰ期切除安全、有效。