腹腔镜下微创手术在胃癌治疗中的临床价值

目的探讨腹腔镜下微创手术在胃癌治疗中的临床应用价值。方法将80例胃癌患者根据手术方式不同随机分为传统开腹组和腹腔镜组,观察并比较2组患者的手术治疗效果。结果腹腔镜组的手术切口、术中出血量、手术时间、肛门排气时间、肠道功能恢复时间和住院时间明显少于传统开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);传统开腹组清扫淋巴结数量和腹腔镜组无明显差异(P>0.05);同时腹腔镜组的并发症情况也较少。结论腹腔镜下微创切除术治疗胃癌的疗效与开腹手术相近,而且创口小,术后恢复较快。     

胃癌腹腔镜手术的循证医学评价

腹腔镜胃癌手术已近20年的历史,其运用范围已日益广泛。但是,目前腹腔镜胃癌手术仍未被大多数临床医师所掌握。相关循证医学证据显示,腹腔镜胃癌手术能够达到与开腹手术相当的肿瘤根治效果,且使其具有较好的微创效果。在远期疗效方面,早期胃癌的腹腔镜手术已经获得良好的远期疗效,而在进展期胃癌方面,仍缺乏多中心的前瞻性随机对照研究结果来评价腹腔镜手术的优劣。外科医师只有严格选择合适病例,手术中严格遵循恶性肿瘤手术的根治原则,才能使腹腔镜胃癌根治术不仅具有微创优势,而且可以取得与开腹手术相当的远期疗效。      

胃癌急性穿孔32例

 目的　探讨胃癌急性穿孔的外科治疗方法。方法　回顾分析1996年1月至2009年1月胃癌急性穿孔32例患者的诊断及手术治疗方式的临床资料。结果　32例患者均经术后病理确诊,术前考虑到胃癌穿孔9例,根治性切除5例、姑息性切除9例,单纯穿孔修补16例,其中腹腔镜下修补4例,穿孔修补加胃空肠短路手术2例。术后发生并发症3例,住院期间死亡1例。结论　对于胃癌急性穿孔的病例,应及早进行手术治疗,但是手术方式的选择是减少术后并发症、延长生存时间的关键。     

腹腔镜下胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌患者的临床疗效

目的 探讨腹腔镜下胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌患者的临床疗效.方法 根据手术方式将192例接受手术治疗的进展期胃癌患者分为腹腔镜组和传统组,每组96例.传统组患者采用开腹手术方式,腹腔镜组患者采用腹腔镜下手术方式.比较两组患者的手术指标(切口长度、手术时间、淋巴结清扫数目、术中出血量)、术后恢复指标(首次排气时间、首次进食时间、首次下床活动时间、术后疼痛评分、住院时间)及术后并发症发生情况.观察两组患者术前、术后血清炎性因子[白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、超敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)]及应激反应指标[5-羟色胺(5-HT)、P物质(SP)、去甲肾上腺素(NE)]的变化情况.结果 腹腔镜组患者切口长度明显短于传统组,术中出血量明显少于传统组,手术时间明显长于传统组,术后首次排气时间、首次进食时间、首次下床活动时间、住院时间均明显短于传统组,术后疼痛评分明显低于传统组,术后并发症总发生率明显低于传统组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.01).两组患者淋巴结清扫数目比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05).术后,两组患者血清炎性因子水平、应激反应指标水平均高于本组术前,且腹腔镜组血清炎性因子水平、应激反应指标水平均低于传统组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.05).结论 胸腔镜下胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌患者可达传统开腹术切除水平,能够减轻患者术后应激反应与炎性反应,降低术后并发症总发生率.     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术治疗进展

腹腔镜手术在结直肠癌外科治疗上的应用迅猛发展,然而腹腔镜结直肠癌手术操作相对复杂,且要达到开腹手术所要求的肿瘤根治的目的,所以对外科医师的手术操作技能和经验要求更高。腹腔镜结直肠癌手术是否优于传统开腹手术,一直是争论的焦点。1993年英国医生GuiUon等报道了59例腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的初步经验,并证明了其技术上的     

腹腔镜辅助远端 D2根治术与传统开腹术对胃癌的疗效研究

目的比较腹腔镜辅助远端D2根治术与传统开腹术对胃癌的疗效。方法 120例胃癌患者,其中行腹腔镜辅助远端D2根治术51例(观察组),传统开腹手术69例(对照组)。结果术前两组患者的临床特征指标无明显组间差异(P>0.05);对照组手术施行时间明显短于观察组(P<0.05);观察组术中出血量、手术切口长度、术后肛门排气时间、术后住院时间和切口愈合情况上均优于对照组(P<0.05);两组淋巴结清扫数量比较无显著差异;观察组发生肺部感染12例,对照组发生肺部感染17例(P>0.05)。随访结果显示所有患者均存活,无远处转移病例。结论腹腔镜辅助下远端D2胃癌根治术安全性高、创伤小、出血少,临床效果优于传统开腹手术。     

胃癌腹腔镜辅助手术与开放手术临床疗效回顾性配对研究

目的:评价腹腔镜辅助手术应用于胃癌治疗是否具有与传统开腹手术相同的安全性及可靠性。方法:回顾性研究我院自2010年1月至2015年12月716例确诊为胃癌且行根治性手术治疗的患者。采用1∶1配对设计,最终获得行腹腔镜辅助手术和开腹手术各116例纳入本研究。对比两种手术方式在近期疗效及远期疗效方面的差异。结果:术中出血量腹腔镜组为（115.8±58.2） ml,开腹组为（185.9±165.4） ml;首次下床活动时间腹腔镜组为（2.4±0.7）天,开腹组为（3.3±1.1）天;术后肛门排气时间腹腔镜组为（3.8±1.5）天,开腹组为（4.4±1.7 ）天;术后流质饮食时间腹腔镜组为（3.9±1.5）天,开腹组为（4.7±2.3）天,以上差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。腹腔镜组术中平均清扫淋巴结（24.7±12.1）枚,开腹组为（24.3±10.2）枚;术中淋巴结清扫及术后并发症方面,两组差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。远期临床疗效显示,进展期胃癌患者术后3年的累积生存率腔镜组与开腹组为79.0% vs 75.8%,差异无统计学意义(P=0.236)。结论:对于胃癌患者采用腹腔镜辅助手术方式近期疗效优于开放手术,且该手术方法具有一定的安全可靠性,两者远期临床疗效相似。     

胃癌微创治疗之路

外科手术是目前唯一可能治愈胃癌的手段,但传统的开腹手术通常伴随较高的并发症率和死亡率,还会对患者术后的生活质量产生较大影响。而微创外科技术由于可有效减少手术创伤,加快术后恢复,因此对于医生和患者均具有很大的吸引力,今后或将替代传统的开腹手术。目前,胃癌微创外科技术主要向着两个不同的方向发展,即内镜下肿瘤切除和腹腔镜手术。不久的将来,前哨淋巴结导航技术和机器人手术也将为胃癌治疗提供更多选择。随着各种微创技术的不断发展,胃癌患者术后的生活质量将显著改善。目前,许多有关各种微创技术的高水平临床研究正在进行当中,胃癌微创外科必将在世界范围内广为接受,并快速发展。      

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术治疗进展

腹腔镜手术在结直肠癌外科治疗上的应用迅猛发展,然而腹腔镜结直肠癌手术操作相对复杂,且要达到开腹手术所要求的肿瘤根治的目的,所以对外科医师的手术操作技能和经验要求更高。腹腔镜结直肠癌手术是否优于传统开腹手术,一直是争论的焦点。1993年英国医生GuiUon等报道了59例腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的初步经验，并证明了其技术上的可行性。     

肠道支架置入联合腹腔镜手术治疗左半结肠癌梗阻的疗效分析

目的:比较加速康复外科理念指导下的肠道支架置入后联合腹腔镜手术与急诊开腹手术治疗左半结肠癌性梗阻患者的短期疗效,探讨加速康复外科理念指导下肠道支架置入后腹腔镜手术在左半结肠癌梗阻治疗中的应用效果.方法:回顾性分析2016年01月至2019年10月在我院普外一科治疗的56例左半结肠癌并完全性肠梗阻患者.根据治疗方式将患者...     

腹腔镜远端胃癌D2根治术在进展期胃癌中的临床应用价值

目的:对比分析完全腹腔镜与开腹远端胃癌D2根治术在进展期胃癌中的应用价值。方法:回顾性分析我院2013年1月至2014年12月收治的接受完全腹腔镜胃癌D2根治手术的进展期胃癌患者40例(腹腔镜组）及接受开腹胃癌D2根治手术的进展期胃癌患者36例（开腹组）的临床资料。对比分析两组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、术后住院时间、术后并发症、淋巴结清除数、肿瘤距远近切缘距离。结果:腹腔镜组手术时间明显较开腹组长,但术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、术后住院时间均少于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）;两组术后并发症发生率、淋巴结清扫数目及两组远、近切端距肿瘤距离比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论:完全腹腔镜远端胃癌D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌是安全、可行的,可以达到与开腹手术同样的根治效果。     

Current status of robot-assisted gastric surgery

In an effort to minimize the limitations of laparoscopy,a robotic surgery system was introduced,but its role for gastric cancer is still unclear.The objective of this article is to assess the current status of robotic surgery for gastric cancer and to predict future prospects.Although the current study was limited by its small number of patients and retrospective nature,robot-assisted gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer is a feasible and safe procedure for experienced laparoscopic surgeons.Most studies have reported satisfactory results for postoperative short-term coutcomes,such as:postoperative oral feeding,gas out,hospital stay and complications,compared with laparoscopic surgery;the difference is a longer operation time.However,robotic surgery showed a shallow learning curve compared with the familarity of conventional open surgery;after the accumulation of several cases,robotic surgery could be expected to result in a similar operation time.Robotic-assisted gastrectomy can expand the indications of minimally invasive surgery to include advanced gastric cancer by improving the ability to perform lymphadenectomy.Moreover," total" robotic gastrectomy can be facilitated using a robotsewing technique and gastric submucosal tumors near the gastroesophageal junction or pylorus can be resected safely by this novel technique.In conclusion,robotassisted gastrectomy may offer a good alternative to conventional open or laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer,provided that long-term oncologic outcomes can be confirmed.     

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer — toward a confluence of two major streams: a review

The minimalization of therapeutic invasiveness in order to preserve quality of life (QOL) is a major topic in the management of early gastric cancer. After laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer was introduced by Kitano et al. in 1991, an enthusiasm to develop laparoscopic procedures has grown steadily. In the initial phase, early gastric cancer limited to the mucosal layer with no risk of lymph node metastasis was treated by laparoscopic wedge resection or intragastric mucosal resection. Since technical and instrumental advances in endoscopic treatment were achieved by gastroenterologists, these cases can be managed by intraluminal endoscopic approaches. The attention of surgeons then shifted to more radical procedures such as laparoscopic gastrectomy with lymph node dissection, which is comparable to open surgery and can be indicated even in advanced cancer. Although this paradigm shift has already been realized in the field of colorectal surgery, we must pay attention to the particular biological nature of gastric cancer in terms of the potential of peritoneal dissemination. While early-phase recovery after surgery has been improved by laparoscopic surgery, preservation of late-phase QOL by function-preserving surgery is also essential in this regard; therefore, the sentinel node (SN) concept has been a much-discussed topic in gastric cancer surgery to approach this aspect. Recently, the validity of the SN concept has been demonstrated by a number of single institutional studies, and prospective multicenter trials are currently ongoing. Theoretically, various types of function-preserving surgery could be applied in cases of early gastric cancer with negative SNs as less invasive surgery to improve long-term QOL. Although we still have to solve several remaining issues in the treatment of gastric cancers, a confluence of these two major streams, laparoscopic surgery and sentinel node navigation surgery, would enable us to apply a novel individualized minimally invasive approach, both in terms of degree of incisional access and extent of function preservation.     

快速康复外科联合腹腔镜应用于远端胃癌根治术的安全性及可行性分析

目的 探讨快速康复外科联合腹腔镜应用于远端胃癌根治术的安全性及可行性.方法 随机选取行远端胃癌根治手术治疗的60例患者,根据手术方式及围手术期处理方案随机分为4组,15例实施传统的开腹远端胃切除术(第1组);15例实施快速康复外科开腹远端胃切除术(第2组);15例实施传统的腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术(第3组);15例实施快速康复外科腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术(第4组).并将这4组远端胃癌患者的手术情况、临床特征、血清白蛋白水平及术后复发等情况进行分析对比.结果 通过对比分析,第1组无论在排气时间、术后住院时间均长于其他3组,在术后血清水平指标上均低于其他3组;第4组的术后血清水平最高,在排气时间及术后住院治疗时间方面相对较低.结论 快速康复外科联合腹腔镜应用于远端胃癌根治术,可以改善患者的营养状态,促进患者术后早期胃肠功能恢复,缩短住院时间,加快患者康复,因此与传统的手术处理、腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术相比,是安全、有效、可行的.     

腹腔镜与开放胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的对比研究

目的比较腹腔镜与开放手术治疗进展期胃癌的术后短期疗效。方法回顾分析2007年10月至2009年10月间,收住我科的67例腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术及同期70例开放胃癌根治术的进展期胃癌患者的临床资料。结果腹腔镜及开放手术平均手术时间分别为209．00±40．71min和133．25±37．45min（P〈O．05）,平均出血量分别为161．83±196．37ml和258．92±56．83ml（P〈O．05）,平均排气时间分别为42．12±21．36h和64．92±31．58h（P〈O．05）,开始进食流质时间分别为2．11±1．28d和3．56±1．91d（P〈O．05）,术后平均住院时间分别为5．36±1．88d和8．28±3．48d（P〈O．05）。结论腹腔镜下远端胃癌根治术是安全可行的,并且在术中失血、术后早期进食,缩短住院日方面较开腹手术更有优势。     

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: has the time come for considered it a standard procedure?

Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymphadenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer. A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase III evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer. At present, laparoscopic gastrectomy is considered a standard procedure for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries. On the other hand, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer have been recently published, in particular concerning the latest results obtained by laparoscopic approach to advanced gastric cancer. It seems very useful to update the review of literature in light of these new evidences for this subject and draw some considerations.     

Controversies in surgical treatment of gastric cancer

Conservative surgery is performed for patients with early gastric cancer, according to the guideline proposed from Japanese Gastric Cancer Society. There are many kinds of operations, such as ordinary open surgery, laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy, laparoscopic intragastric surgery, pyrolus preserving gastrectomy, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Indications of the operations are various, but it is necessary to have standard indication for each procedure. Standard operation for advanced gastric cancer in Japan is D2 gastrectomy. Surgeons in Eastern world believed that D1 + alpha or D1 + adjuvant radio-chemotherapy are the standard treatments, because of high incidence of mortality and morbidity after D2 dissection. In Japan, D4 dissection has been performed for patients with nodal involvement, and the validity of D4 dissection is now studied by two randomized trials. Combined resection for T4 tumor is believed to be mandatory. However, the validity of pancreato-splenectomy to yield a complete clearance of No. 10 or No. 11 lymph node station is in controversial, because of high incidence of the postoperative development of pancreatic fistula, anastomotic insufficiency and abscess. There was no prospective study to confirm the effect of omentectomy. Patients with advanced gastric cancer showing a serosal invasion-diameter less than 2.5 cm have less risk of peritoneal recurrence. It may be valuable to perform randomized controlled study consisting of omentum-preserving gastrectomy and gastrectomy with omentectomy. Prognosis of patients with peritoneal dissemination was improved by intraperitoneal chomo hyporthormia and peritonectomy, and prospective studies should be done to compare the effects of systemic chemotherapy and regional chemotherapy combined with peritonectomy. Furthermore, effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cytoreduction with R0 resection should be confirmed by prospective studies.     

腹腔镜胃癌根治术与开放性胃癌根治术的对比研究

目的　通过比较腹腔镜下胃癌根治术与开放性胃癌根治术的差异,探讨腹腔镜下胃癌根治性的可行性。方法 选取２００８年５月至２００９年１０月行腹腔镜下胃癌根治性切除术８１例,其中根治性远端胃癌根治术４８例,根治性近端胃癌根治术１９例,根治性全胃切除术１４例,与开放性胃癌根治术（相同分期）８０例的病例资料作回顾性分析。结果　８１例均在腹腔镜辅助下完成手术,Ｄ１淋巴结清扫６例,Ｄ２淋巴结清扫７５例。腹腔镜手术和开放性手术的平均手术时间分别为２５８ｍｉｎ和１９３ｍｉｎ（Ｐ＜０.０５）,术中平均出血量分别为２９２ｍｌ和３８９ｍｌ（Ｐ＜０.０５）,清扫淋巴结平均数分别为１６.５枚和１７.８枚（Ｐ＞０.０５）;术后平均胃肠功能恢复时间分别为２.９天和３.９天（Ｐ＜０.０５）;腹腔镜手术组术中无脏器损伤,术后无出血、吻合口漏及肺部感染等并发症,无手术死亡病例。结论　腹腔镜下胃癌根治术安全、可行,与开放性胃癌根治术具有相同的淋巴结清扫范围。     

Laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: Current status and future direction

Gastric cancer is still a major cause of death worldwide. While laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has gained evidence as a standard treatment for early gastric cancer in the distal stomach, there are still concerns regarding its application for gastric cancer in the upper stomach and advanced gastric cancer. Nevertheless, LG has shown to have faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, less pain, and less blood loss in many retrospective and prospective studies. The application of LG has now extended from conventional radical gastrectomy to novel approaches such as function-preserving gastrectomy and sentinel-node navigated surgery. Studies on the use of laparoscopy in treatment for stage IV gastric cancer are rare, but show that there may be some roles of LG in selected cases. With the development of new laparoscopic tools that augment human ability, the future of LG should move on from proving non-inferiority to demonstrating superiority compared to the traditional open gastrectomy.     

Surgery for gastric cancer: 10-year experience worldwide

To demonstrate recent experience of gastric cancer surgery worldwide and to evaluate modern strategies for the treatment of gastric cancer, we investigated the English-language literature of the past 10 years, based on papers published in well-known medical journals. In many countries, the increased detection of early gastric cancer, advanced operative procedures, and careful postoperative management have improved the surgical results of gastric cancer over the years. Although randomized controlled trials in Europe showed no survival benefit of D2 resection over D1 resection, the results must be interpreted with caution and cannot be extrapolated to Japanese patients, because the morbidity and mortality after D2 gastrectomy in Japan are much less than those after D1 gastrectomy in Europe. Recently, less invasive treatments, including endoscopic mucosal resection and laparoscopic gastrectomy, have become feasible for patients with early gastric cancer, but their risks and benefits compared with traditional gastrectomy are unclear. Received: February 28, 2001 / Accepted: August 3, 2001