腹腔镜辅助结直肠癌根治术对机体应激反应的影响

目的:探讨腹腔镜辅助和开腹结直肠癌根治术对机体应激反应的影响。方法:选择2年来收治的结直肠癌患者40例。20例行腹腔镜辅助结直肠癌根治术(LAP组); 20例行开腹结直肠癌根治术(OP组)。比较两组患者术前及术后第1~3天外周静脉血血糖(BG)，胰岛素(Ins)，三碘甲状腺原氨酸(T3)，四碘甲状腺原氨酸(T4)，促甲状腺激素刺激激素（TSH），皮质醇(CS)的变化。结果:两组的临床病理资料均具可比性（P＞0.05）。两种术式术后第1天BG及CS均升高，至术后第2天LAP组BG及CS恢复至术前水平（P＞0.05）; OP组至术后第3天恢复至术前水平（P＞0.05）。OP组术后第2天BG及CS水平明显高于LAP组（P＜0.05）。两种术式术后第1天Ins，T3及T4均降低，LAP组该3指标至术后第2天恢复至术前水平（P＞0.05），而OP组至术后第3天恢复至术前水平（P＞0.05）。OP组术后第2天Ins，T3及T4水平明显低于LAP组（P＜0.05）。LAP组与OP组手术前后TSH无统计学差异（P＞0.05）。结论:腹腔镜结直肠癌手术与开腹根治术比较，前者机体应激反应持续时间较短，反应强度较轻。     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术学习曲线

目的探讨腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的学习曲线。方法回顾性分析2008年10月-2011年6月同一组医师连续开展的60例腹腔镜结直肠癌手术,按手术先后次序分为A、B、C3组,每组20例,3组年龄、性别、Dukes分期和手术方式等方面有可比性。比较各组的手术时间、出血量、淋巴结清扫数目、肠蠕动恢复时间、并发症、中转开腹率和术后住院时间。结果A、B组的手术时间分别为（242±32）min、（236±28）min,显著长于c组（212±30）min（F;5．58,P=0．006）;A、B组的出血量分别为（126±23）ml、（129±30）ml,显著多于c组（105±18）ml（F=5．85,P=0．005）。中转开腹率由A组的20％（4／20）、B组的15％（3／20）下降到c组的5％（1／20）（,=2．019,P=0．364）。3组淋巴结清扫数目、肠蠕动恢复时间、并发症发生率和术后住院时间差异无显著性（P〉0．05）。结论腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的学习曲线大致为40例。     

腹腔镜下结直肠癌手术对机体免疫功能的影响

目的:探讨腹腔镜和开腹结直肠癌根治术对机体免疫功能的影响。方法:2003年12月至2006年3月,同一手术组将60例结直肠癌患者随机分为腹腔镜组和开腹组,各30例。分别于术前1d和术后第3天、1、2周取外周静脉血,测定C反映蛋白(CRP)、IL-6、免疫球蛋白IgA、Ig M、IgG,CD3 、CD4 、CD8 及NK细胞活性进行比较。结果:术后第3天,两组患者外周血CD3 、CD4 、CD4 /CD8 及NK细胞活性比较无显著性差异(P>0·05),开腹组患者术后第1周、2周显著低于腹腔镜组(P<0·01)。IL-6术后第1、3天,开腹组明显高于腹腔镜组(P<0·01)。CRP术后第3、7天,开腹组明显高于腹腔镜组(P<0·01,P<0·05)。Ig M术后第3天腹腔镜组高于开腹组(P<0·05),IgA,IgG两组间无统计学差异(P>0·05)。结论:腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术比传统开腹手术对机体影响小,在免疫功能保护上更具有优势。     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术5例报告

目的 :报告结直肠癌腹腔镜手术 5例 ,总结初步经验。方法 :2 0 0 2年 7月～ 2 0 0 3年 11月对 2例直肠癌、2例升结肠癌、1例降结肠癌行腹腔镜手术。直肠癌用直线切割闭合器切断闭合直肠 ,标本由腹壁小切口取出 ,经肛门行结直肠吻合器吻合 ;升结肠癌和降结肠癌行半结肠切除 ,经腹壁小切口提出、切除肠管 ,手法吻合。结果 :5例手术顺利完成 ,无手术并发症 ,近期效果良好。结论 :只要能熟练掌握开腹结直肠癌手术和熟练掌握腹腔镜技术 ,行腹腔镜结直肠癌手术是可行的。     

腹腔镜与开腹结直肠癌手术对机体免疫功能的比较

为比较腹腔镜和开腹结直肠癌根治术对机体免疫功能的影响，笔者将2年间收治的60 例结直肠癌患者随机分为腹腔镜组和开腹组，各30例 。由同一手术组对60例患者实施手术。分别于术前1d的和术后第3天及第1，2 周取外周静脉血，测定C反应蛋白（CRP），IL-6，免疫球蛋白IgA，IgM，IgG， CD3+ ，CD4+，CD8+及NK细胞活性;对两组细胞活性进行比较。结果示，术后第3 天,两组患者外周血CD3+ ，CD4 +，CD4+/ CD8+及NK 细胞活性差异无显著性 (P>0.05) ;但于术后第1，2 周开腹组显著低于腹腔镜组 (P<0.01) 。术后第3 天，开腹组IL-6明显高于腹腔镜组（P<0.01）。术后第3，7d，开腹组CRP明显高于腹腔镜组（P<0.01，P<0.05）。术后第3天腹腔镜组IgM高于开腹组（P<0.05）;IgA,IgG两组间无统计学差异（P>0.05）。提示腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术比传统开腹手术对机体影响小，对保护患者免疫功能具有优势。     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术临床评价

目的 探讨腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的可行性。方法 对比研究腹腔镜治疗结直肠癌24例与同期开腹手术20例。结果 两组手术时间、术后并发症差异无显性，腹腔镜组出血量少，康复快，住院时间短，但不包括中转手术病例。结论腹腔镜结直肠癌手术能体现其微创优点，但应降低并发症及手术中转率。     

腹腔镜与开腹结直肠癌手术对机体应激反应及细胞免疫功能影响的比较

比较腹腔镜与开腹结直肠癌根治术对机体应激反应及细胞免疫功能的影响,为腹腔镜手术在结直肠肿瘤中的优势提供依据。选择同一手术组的结直肠癌患者45例,随机分为腹腔镜手术组21例(LCR组)和开腹手术组24例(OCR组),分别在术前1 d和术后第1、6天取外周静脉血,测定CRP、血清淀粉样蛋白A(SAA)、IL-6水平和CD3+、CD4+、CD8+细胞并进行比较。术后第1、6天LCR组的CRP、SAA、IL-6均明显低于OCR组,2组比较差异均有统计学意义(P0.01);术后第6天OCR组的CD3+、CD4+、CD4+/CD8+明显低于LCR组,2组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.01);2组患者手术前后不同时相点的CRP、SAA、CD3+、CD4+、CD4+/CD8+组内比较,差异均有统计学意义(P0.01),LCR组IL-6在术后第1天明显高于术前(P0.01),第6天接近术前水平(P0.05)。腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术对机体细胞免疫功能和应激反应的影响明显小于开腹手术。     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术对机体影响的探讨

目的探讨腹腔镜下结直肠癌手术的低侵袭性。方法将符合纳入研究对象标准的40例结直肠癌患者随机分成腹腔镜组(20例)和开腹组(20例),比较两组患者围手术期(术前、术后当天、术后第1、3、5d)的外周血白介素(IL)-6、IL-8、肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α、C反应蛋白(CRP)、可溶性细胞间黏附分子(sICAM-1)、白细胞CD11b的变化。结果开腹组术后细胞因子(TNF-α、IL-6、IL-8)明显高于腹腔镜组(P<0.05)。开腹组术后6h、第1天时,sICAM-1的动态变化较腹腔镜组显著升高,开腹组外周血白细胞CD11b在术后6h降至最低(161.98±48.42),较腹腔镜组(189.51±46.45)明显低(P<0.05)。结论结直肠癌的腹腔镜手术比传统开腹手术对机体影响小,具有明显的低侵袭性。     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术20例体会

<正>腹腔镜结直肠手术相对于腹腔镜胆囊切除术发展滞后。原因主要有结直肠手术分离范围涉及腹腔和盆腔的各象限,淋巴结清扫技术要求高[1]。1991年腹腔镜被用于结直肠外科[2],并以出血少、对胃肠干扰轻、术后疼痛轻、康复快等优点逐渐被广大医师和患者所接受。2008～2010年我院应用     

腹腔镜结直肠癌手术现状及展望

腹腔镜结直肠手术在我国已开展20多年,尤其近十余年发展迅猛,从刚开始的摸石头过河,至现在以严谨的循证医学证据为后盾,渐与传统开腹手术并驾齐驱,且有赶超之势。腹腔镜结肠癌手术因解剖位置及空间关系,治疗器械较多,方法多样,且开展早,有长期多中心医学论证其在术后恢复、淋巴清扫、出血及术后并发症等方面优势明显。腹腔镜直肠癌手术因空间小,欧美系病种较少,手术难度较结肠癌大,发展也较晚,部分指南仍要求以临床研究为主,但近年亚洲及欧美循证医学证据渐出,亦发展迅速。随着科技发展,新技术的成熟与应用,未来腹腔镜结直肠癌外科治疗会向着器械多样化、微创精细化、损伤最小化、美容最佳化、康复最快化、治疗最便捷化发展,其前景是广阔、光明的。     

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Background:

Robotic approaches have become increasingly used for colorectal surgery. The aim of this study is to examine the safety and efficacy of robotic colorectal procedures in an adult population.

Study Design:

A systematic review of articles in both PubMed and Embase comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal procedures was performed. Clinical trials and observational studies in an adult population were included. Approaches were evaluated in terms of operative time, length of stay, estimated blood loss, number of lymph nodes harvested, and perioperative complications. Mean net differences and odds ratios were calculated to examine treatment effect of each group.

Results:

Two hundred eighteen articles were identified, and 17 met the inclusion criteria, representing 4,342 patients: 920 robotic and 3,422 in the laparoscopic group. Operative time for the robotic approach was 38.849 minutes longer (95% confidence interval: 17.944 to 59.755). The robotic group had lower estimated blood loss (14.17 mL; 95% confidence interval: –27.63 to –1.60), and patients were 1.78 times more likely to be converted to an open procedure (95% confidence interval: 1.24 to 2.55). There was no difference between groups with respect to number of lymph nodes harvested, length of stay, readmission rate, or perioperative complication rate.

Conclusions:

The robotic approach to colorectal surgery is as safe and efficacious as conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, it is associated with longer operative time and an increased rate of conversion to laparotomy. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted to examine the cost-effectiveness of robotic colorectal surgery before it can be adopted as the new standard of care.     

Outcomes of Conversion of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery to Open Surgery

Objectives:

There is limited data regarding the outcomes of patients who undergo conversion to open surgery during a laparoscopic operation in colorectal resection. We sought to identify the outcomes of such patients.

Methods:

The NIS (National Inpatient Sample) database was used to identify patients who had conversion from laparoscopic to open colorectal surgery during the 2009 to 2012 period. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify risk-adjusted outcomes of conversion to open surgery.

Results:

We sampled 776 007 patients who underwent colorectal resection. 337 732 (43.5%) of the patients had laparoscopic resection. Of these, 48 265 procedures (14.3%) were converted to open surgery. The mortality of converted patients was increased, when compared with successfully completed laparoscopic operations, but was still lower than that of open procedures (0.6% vs. 1.4% vs. 3.9%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.61 and 0.58, respectively; P < .01). The most common laparoscopic colorectal procedure was right colectomy (41.2%). The lowest rate of conversion is seen with right colectomy while proctectomy had the highest rate of conversion (31.2% vs. 12.9%, AOR, 2.81, P < .01). Postsurgical complications including intra-abdominal abscess (AOR, 2.64), prolonged ileus (AOR, 1.50), and wound infection (AOR, 2.38) were higher in procedures requiring conversion (P < .01).

Conclusions:

Conversion of laparoscopic to open colorectal resection occurs in 14.3% of cases. Compared with patients who had laparoscopic operations, patients who had conversion to open surgery had a higher mortality, higher overall morbidity, longer length of hospitalization, and increased hospital charges. The lowest conversion rate was in right colectomy and the highest was in proctectomy procedures. Wound infection in converted procedures is higher than in laparoscopic and open procedures.     

腹腔镜结直肠癌术后下肢深静脉血栓的Meta分析

目的探讨腹腔镜与开腹结直肠癌手术后下肢深静脉血栓（deep venous thrombosis,DVT）发生率的差异。方法收集1989年1月～2010年5月已公开发表的腹腔镜与开腹结直肠癌手术后DVT发生情况的随机对照研究结果,按照Meta分析的要求对初步检索到的所有研究结果的质量进行评估和筛选,对入选的所有研究结果进行Meta分析,计算腹腔镜手术组相对开腹手术组术后发生DVT的优势比（odds ratio,OR）,评价腹腔镜手术和开腹手术后DVT发生率有无统计学差异。结果符合纳入标准的共9篇文章,总样本量2606例。其中腹腔镜手术组1453例,发生术后DVT11例;开腹手术组1153例,发生术后DVT15例。合并OR=0.63,95%可信区间为0.31~1.27。结论与开腹结直肠癌手术相比,腹腔镜手术不会增加术后DVT发生的风险。     

Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Polyps

Background:

Size, location, and type of colonic polyps may prevent colonoscopic polypectomy. Laparoscopic colectomy may serve as an optimal alternative in these patients. We assessed the perioperative outcome and the risk for cancer in patients operated on laparoscopically for colonic polyps not amenable to colonoscopic resection.

Methods:

An evaluation was conducted of our prospective accumulated data of a consecutive series of patients operated on for colonic polyps.

Results:

Sixty-four patients underwent laparoscopic re-section for colonic polyps during a 6-year period. This group comprised 18% of all our laparoscopic colorectal procedures. Forty-six percent were males, mean age was 71. Most of the polyps (66%) were located on the right side. No deaths occurred. Conversion was necessary in 3 patients (4.6%). Significant complications occurred in 3 patients (4.6%). Nine patients (14%) were found to have malignancy. Three of them had lymph-node involvement. No difference existed in polyp size between malignant and nonmalignant lesions.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic colectomy for endoscopic nonresectable colonic polyps is a safe, simple procedure as reflected by the low rate of conversions and complications. However, invasive cancer may be found in the final pathology following surgery. This mandates a strict adherence to surgical oncological principles. Polyp size cannot predict the risk of malignancy.     

Robot-Assisted Versus Standard Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Background and Objectives:

Over the years, there has been a continual shift toward more minimally invasive surgical techniques, such as the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery. Recently, there has been increasing adoption of robotic technology. Our study aims to compare and contrast robot-assisted and laparoscopic approaches to colorectal operations.

Methods:

Forty patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic colorectal surgery performed by 2 surgeons at an academic center, regardless of indication, were included in this retrospective review. Patients undergoing open approaches were excluded. Study outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, complications, and conversion rate to an open procedure.

Results:

Twenty-five laparoscopic and fifteen robot-assisted colorectal surgeries were performed. The mean patient age was 61.1 ± 10.7 years in the laparoscopic group compared with 61.1 ± 8.5 years in the robotic group (P = .997). Patients had a similar body mass index and history of abdominal surgery. Mean blood loss was 163.3 ± 249.2 mL and 96.8 ± 157.7 mL, respectively (P = .385). Operative times were similar, with 190.8 ± 84.3 minutes in the laparoscopic group versus 258.4 ± 170.8 minutes in the robotic group (P = .183), as were lengths of hospital stay: 9.6 ± 7.3 and 6.5 ± 3.8 days, respectively (P = .091). In addition, there was no difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested between the laparoscopic group (14.0 ± 6.5) and robotic group (12.3 ± 4.2, P = .683).

Conclusions:

In our early experience, the robotic approach to colorectal surgery can be considered both safe and efficacious. Furthermore, it also preserves oncologically sufficient outcomes when performed for cancer operations.     

Is Laparoscopic Surgery the Standard of Care for GI Luminal Cancer?

As surgeons in India strive to keep pace with the technical advances in the field of laparoscopic surgery, we endeavor to evaluate the mounting global evidence regarding laparoscopic gastric and colorectal resections for cancer. We seem to be riding on the crest of excellence in traditional open surgery for gastrointestinal malignancies, opening avenues for research and for the establishment of practice guidelines in laparoscopic surgery. Results from available trials along with those from ongoing studies are paving the path toward the acceptance and standardization of these procedures. What must be ascertained is whether sound oncological principles, which are ultimately exhibited by long-term outcomes, are being preserved while garnering the established benefits of minimally invasive surgery.     

Laparoscopic Bowel Resection in the Setting of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Background This study aimed to review the outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal resection for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. Methods From the prospectively collected database for patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer in our institution, those with stage IV colorectal cancer who underwent elective resection of tumor during the period from January 2000 to June 2006 were included. The outcomes of those with laparoscopic resection were reviewed and comparison was made between patients with laparoscopic and open resection. Results A total of 200 patients (127 men) with median age of 69 years (range: 25–91 years) were included, and 77 underwent laparoscopic resection. Conversion was required in ten patients (13.0%) and all except one conversion were due to fixed or bulky tumors. There was no operative mortality in the laparoscopic group. The complication rate was 14% and the median postoperative hospital stay was 7 days. When patients with laparoscopic resection were compared with those with open operations, there was no difference in age, gender, comorbidity, or tumor size between the two groups. However, the complication rate was significantly lower in those with laparoscopic resection (14% versus 32%, P = 0.007) and the median hospital stay was significantly shorter (7 days versus 8 days, P = 0.005).The operative mortalities and the survivals were similar in the two groups. Conclusions Colorectal resection can be performed safely in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. The operative outcomes in terms of complication rate and hospital stay compare favorably with patients with open resection. Presented in the Scientific Meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons on 18–22 April 2007 in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.     

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的比较

目的探讨腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌的可行性及安全性。方法回顾性分析2006年4月～2011年6月我院155例子宫内膜癌手术的临床资料,其中腹腔镜手术57例（腹腔镜组）,开腹手术98例（开腹组）,比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、淋巴结切除数目、术后肛门排气时间、尿管留置时间、住院时间、术后并发症及复发率。结果腔镜组术中出血量（211．8±109．1）ml明显少于开腹组（305．8±145．1）ml（t=-4．213,P=0．000）,手术时间（236．1±50．8）min明显长于开腹组（185．2±42．3）min（t=6．669,P：0．000）。与开腹组比较,腹腔镜组术后肛门排气时间、术后尿管留置时间、住院时间均明显缩短（t=-7．800,P=0．000;t=-5．779,P=0．000;t=-2．918,P=0．004）。2组盆腔淋巴结切除数目、宫旁组织切除长度、阴道切除长度、术中和术后并发症发生率均无统计学差异（P〉0．05）。术后随访至2012年10月,腹腔镜组53例随访8—66个月,平均30．2月,1例术后21个月复发,1例术后14个月、1例术后28个月死亡;开腹组90例随访10～68个月,平均40．1月,3例分别在术后12、23、32个月复发,3例分别在术后12、22、30个月后死亡。2组生存率无统计学差异（x2=0．267,P=0．605）。结论腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌较开腹手术具有出血少、恢复快等优点,并具有与开腹手术同样的疗效,是子宫内膜癌手术的一个很好的选择。