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。     

腹腔镜技术在胃癌根治术中的应用

腹腔镜胃癌根治术已有近20年的历史[1,2],随着腹腔镜胃癌手术技术不断成熟,设备及器械不断更新,腹腔镜胃癌根治术的术中、术后并发症已与开腹手术无明显差异,甚至优于开腹手术,腹腔镜胃癌根治术的安全性、可行性已经得到证实.如何在不影响患者生存率的前提下,采用微创技术,使胃癌患者既能安全有效地进行手术治疗,又能减轻创伤、改善生存质量,是目前国内外研究的一大热点.因此,本文结合我科经验及国内外本领域的最新进展,就腹腔镜技术在胃癌根治术的应用方面作一论述.     

腹腔镜在胃癌中的应用现状

随着微创外科的理念被引入胃癌外科领域,腹腔镜技术在胃癌诊断及治疗中得到广泛应用。腹腔镜下早期胃癌手术的治疗疗效优于传统开腹手术,并已成为标准手术方式之一,腹腔镜下进展期胃癌手术的近期疗效虽优于传统手术方式,但远期疗效仍缺乏多中心、大样本、前瞻性随机对照研究来验证。     

加速康复外科理念联合微创技术在结直肠癌手术中的应用价值

结直肠癌是常见的消化道恶性肿瘤之一,据我国最新研究报道,其发病率及死亡率均呈上升趋势[1].对于结直肠癌的临床治疗,尽管放化疗、分子靶向药物治疗及综合辅助治疗愈发成熟,但目前最核心的治疗手段依然是规范性的外科手术治疗.近年来临床研究证实,相对于存在创伤大、并发症多等明显不足的传统开腹手术,结直肠癌微创外科治疗更具有优势.腹腔镜、机器人外科系统等微创技术的发展,在保证肿瘤根治性及手术安全性前提下,可以达到减少创伤、加速康复、改善患者生活质量等治疗效果.加速康复外科(enhanced recovery after surgery,ERAS)理念在临床外科领域普及发展[2],经一系列临床研究及Meta分析已证实,ERAS方案可改善结直肠癌手术康复过程,具有减少手术创伤及应激,减少术后并发症,缩短住院时间,降低住院费用,促进患者快速康复等优点[3,4].因此,加速康复外科联合微创外科技术在结直肠癌外科手术治疗的应用前景倍受关注.本文旨在初步探讨加速康复外科理念在结直肠癌微创手术的临床应用价值,以期促进ERAS理念在结直肠癌微创手术中进一步推广.     

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.     

关于腹腔镜胃癌根治术的若干问题

胃癌是我国第二位常见肿瘤,手术切除是其最主要的治疗手段。但传统开腹手术切口大、疼痛明显,并有切口感染甚至裂开等切口相关并发症。腹腔镜手术不用开腹即能完成切除病灶甚至重建等手术操作,并具有切口小、视野清、出血少、恢复快等"微创"优势,深受医生和患者的欢迎,成为近两百年来外科学发展史上与麻醉一样具有重要意义的进步。现本文对腹腔镜技术在胃癌治疗中的有关问题进行综述。     

微创食管癌切除术进展

随着食管手术技术的不断发展,很多国外的肿瘤中心相继开展了旨在减少食管癌手术并发症和死亡率的食管微创手术技术。本文综述了微创食管癌手术的概念、手术方式、淋巴结清扫状况、并发症和死亡率,以及术后的生存质量的情况。目前怎样界定小创伤或微创仍然是一个非常困难的事情,也就是说食管微创手术目前还没有一个统一的标准,但是很多的资料表明食管微创外科有着很多的优势。在手术入路方面,越来越多的进行食管微创手术的医生采取了与当前开放Ivor-Lewis 手术相似的方式,并获得了与开放手术相当甚至更好的淋巴结清扫。食管微创手术的术后生存质量的评价好于开放手术。在手术的并发症与死亡率方面与目前的开放手术相同。考虑到食管微创手术目前仍处于起步阶段,随着技术的不断完善,微创手术将获得更好的效果。当今的食管外科正在向着微创、彻底清扫的方向发展,可以预见在不远的将来,食管外科必将加入微创外科行列。      

微创胃癌根治术治疗胃癌患者的临床分析

目的分析微创胃癌根治术对胃癌患者的临床疗效。方法 105例胃癌患者根据治疗方法不同,分为观察组(60例)和对照组(45例),前者采用微创胃癌根治术,后者采用传统开腹手术,比较观察2组患者清扫淋巴结数、出血量、手术时间及总有效率。结果观察组术中出血量和手术时间明显短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2组术中清扫淋巴结数量比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组总有效率为92.23%,明显高于对照组的的78.55%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论采用微创胃癌根治术治疗胃癌患者的临床疗效确切,能有效改善手术状况和术后恢复情况,值得临床推广应用。     

快速康复外科护理对胃癌患者术后康复及生活质量的影响

目的探讨快速康复外科护理在胃癌患者术后康复中的应用效果。方法将50例胃癌手术患者随机分为观察组和对照组,对照组患者采用常规护理,观察组患者采用快速康复外科护理,比较两组患者的护理效果。结果观察组患者术后输液时间、肠鸣音恢复时间、排便时间和住院时间显著少于对照组,伤口愈合情况好于对照组,术后3d的血清蛋白水平显著高于对照组,C反应蛋白显著低于对照组,两组差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。观察组患者在物质生活、躯体功能、心理功能等生活质量方面的评分均显著高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论快速康复外科护理有利于胃癌手术患者术后早日康复,减轻应激反应,提高生活质量。     

微创腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术与传统开腹手术治疗子宫肌瘤疗效的比较

目的比较微创腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术与传统开腹手术治疗子宫肌瘤的效果。方法选取2013年2月至2014年2月间120例行子宫肌瘤剔除术的患者,根据手术方法分为微创组和开腹组,每组各60例。微创组患者行微创腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术,开腹组患者行传统开腹子宫肌瘤剔除术,比较两组患者的临床疗效。结果微创组患者术中出血量、术后胃肠功能恢复时间、住院时间、术后并发症发生率、症状改善率、子宫异常率、近期肌瘤复发率和1年后复发率均优于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);两组患者的手术时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论微创腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术具有出血少、创伤小、恢复快、并发症少等优势,值得临床推广。     

Chirurgische Therapie des Magenkarzinoms

Background

Gastric cancer is one of the few tumor entities with a decreasing incidence but still constitutes a main cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. The gold standard in therapy regimes with curative intent is surgery; however, palliative regimes should also include surgery in selected cases. Minimally invasive techniques are becoming established leading to improved perioperative outcomes.

Objective

Review of current oncological standards with a focus on the surgical approach in gastric cancer patients, discussion of current controversies regarding surgery with curative and palliative intent and outcomes of minimally invasive techniques.

Material and methods

Review of the literature on surgery of gastric cancer including conventional and minimally invasive tecnhniques.

Results

Surgery is the gold standard in regimes with curative intent for gastric cancer patients. The histological subtype is the basis for decision-making with respect to the extent of gastric resection. Radical D2 lymphadenectomy is the current standard in western countries. Multivisceral resection for locally advanced cancer is worthwhile in selected patients in terms of improved long-term survival despite potentially higher morbidity rates.. In palliative settings surgery can be a tool to improve the quality of life and to control tumor-related complications

Conclusion

Minimally invasive techniques are one of the main technical options to improve the perioperative outcome in gastric cancer patients. Multimodal therapy regimes may improve the quality of life and survival in curative and palliative settings.

     

Minimally invasive treatment for gastric cancer: approaches and selection process

Minimally invasive treatment of gastric cancer has emerged as a result of the technical advances, better understanding of gastric physiology, and more knowledge of the biologic behavior of gastric cancer. This treatment results in improved quality of life embodied by smaller incisions, reduced length of hospital stay, and a faster return to productive life. However, minimally invasive treatment for gastric cancer must take into consideration the potential effects of these techniques on tumor dissemination at the time of the treatment procedure, as well as the rates of recurrence and overall survival. Several technical treatment approaches to gastric cancer have now become possible, utilizing endoscopy, laparoscopy, or an open method. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), limited resection, and laparoscopic surgical resection are the currently practiced modalities as the minimally invasive treatment. Lymph node dissection with the minimally invasive techniques is a barrier to its wide application. Although it is not commonly performed in Western countries, the use of minimally invasive treatment for gastric cancer is growing, especially in Korea and Japan. Minimally invasive treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC) has already been shown to be safe and effective in many retrospective series though no prospective randomized studies comparing it to open resection have been performed. Therefore, routine implementation of these procedures must await confirmatory outcomes generated by well-done randomized prospective clinical trials.     

Erratum to: Gastric Cancer Surgery: An American Perspective on the Current Options and Standards

Gastric cancer is prevalent globally, particularly in Asian countries such as Japan and Korea. While the prevalence of gastric cancer is not nearly as high in the United States (U.S.) as in Asia, the treatment armamentarium differs widely between regions. The role of surgery for gastric cancer in the U.S. has changed drastically over the last decade. While the natural history of gastric cancer seen in the U.S. markedly differs from that seen in Asia, the U.S. experience with endoscopic and minimally invasive techniques is beginning to parallel those seen in Japan and Korea. Minimally invasive surgery has truly come into the forefront of our surgical armamentarium, and its role, along with robotic and endoscopic approaches, remains to be defined as standard of care. At present, minimally invasive approaches appear to offer oncologically equivalent outcomes compared with standard open gastrectomy when performed by experienced surgeons. Extended lymphadenectomy does not appear to offer benefit with improved survival in our patient population, although sufficient lymph node sampling is imperative for adequate staging. Despite aggressive approaches to surgical resection for cure, the U.S. population tends to present with more advanced disease and have a worse prognosis than our Asian counterparts. Palliation with resection and possibly stent placement should be offered for improved quality of life in late-stage disease.     

Gastric Cancer Surgery: An American Perspective on the Current Options and Standards

Gastric cancer is prevalent globally, particularly in Asian countries such as Japan and Korea. While the prevalence of gastric cancer is not nearly as high in the United States (U.S.) as in Asia, the treatment armamentarium differs widely between regions. The role of surgery for gastric cancer in the U.S. has changed drastically over the last decade. While the natural history of gastric cancer seen in the U.S. markedly differs from that seen in Asia, the U.S. experience with endoscopic and minimally invasive techniques is beginning to parallel those seen in Japan and Korea. Minimally invasive surgery has truly come into the forefront of our surgical armamentarium, and its role, along with robotic and endoscopic approaches, remains to be defined as standard of care. At present, minimally invasive approaches appear to offer oncologically equivalent outcomes compared with standard open gastrectomy when performed by experienced surgeons. Extended lymphadenectomy does not appear to offer benefit with improved survival in our patient population, although sufficient lymph node sampling is imperative for adequate staging. Despite aggressive approaches to surgical resection for cure, the U.S. population tends to present with more advanced disease and have a worse prognosis than our Asian counterparts. Palliation with resection and possibly stent placement should be offered for improved quality of life in late-stage disease.     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for cancer

Minimally invasive surgical approaches were designed to enhance quality of care and improve patient outcome by minimizing postoperative pain, shortening hospital stay, reducing costs, and facilitating early return to work and presurgical lifestyle. The hand-assisted laparoscopic approach for resection of cancer is still in its formative stage, and this review places it in proper perspective within the context of minimally invasive surgery currently being performed for both benign and malignant disease. The review also outlines the potential advantages and disadvantages, techniques, and site-specific procedures of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for cancer.     

Minimally invasive treatment of stomach cancer

The rate of detection of early gastric cancer has increased because of the development of diagnostic techniques, such as endoscopy, biopsy, and endoscopic ultrasonography. Recently, minimally invasive surgical procedures for benign gastric conditions have been advocated, and the laparoscopic approach is noted as a technique that increases the quality of life. However, the development of laparoscopic gastric resections and laparoscopically assisted gastric operations for malignancy still deserve a word of caution. Laparoscopic local resection of the stomach is used to treat mucosal cancer without lymph node metastasis, and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy is used to treat early gastric cancer with lymph node metastasis in the perigastric portion. According to short-term results reported by a small group of surgeons, laparoscopic approaches for gastric cancer result in a minimally invasive approach, early recovery, and decreased morbidity and mortality. However, the longterm results of these less invasive treatments are not known in advanced gastric cancer. If the results of randomized controlled studies for advanced gastric cancer are confirmed, the use of these techniques will spread worldwide and may become a standard technique for the resection of gastric cancer.     

Gastric cancer

With the development of related instruments and techniques, laparoscopic surgery has come to be applied to treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies as a minimally invasive surgery. For early gastric cancers with negligible risk of lymph node metastasis, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), laparoscopic wedge resection (LWR), and laparoscopic intragastric mucosal resection (IGMR) have been performed. For those with fairly sizable risk of lymph node metastasis, laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is applied. Our studies have suggest that LADG is more useful than open distal gastrectomy in the management of patients with gastric cancer from the viewpoints of curability, minimal invasiveness, and quality of life of patients.     

Endoskopische Resektion und minimal-invasive Verfahren beim Magenkarzinom

Endoscopic therapy of early gastric carcinoma is not completely established in the western world. Recently the discovery of early tumor stages and the option of curative surgical therapy, and if possible endoscopic resection, has become the aim of diagnostic endoscopic measures. Endoscopic resection of mucosal early gastric carcinoma (EMR) is now the method of choice in Japan. Nowadays there are successful standard techniques of endoscopic resection. A direct dissection of the submucosa with modified needle knives has been classified as endoscopic submucosa dissection (ESD). An international study group under German leadership investigated the practicability of ESD. The results showed that diagnosis and therapy of early gastric cancer is possible outside Japan, but obviously with clearly different results. A broad usage of EMR or ESD for early gastric cancer by institutes inexperienced in the diagnosis and therapy of gastrointestinal neoplasms and outside prospective studies must therefore be advised against. Minimally invasive surgical procedures and local excision techniques must be considered on an individual basis.     

Function-preserving gastrectomy based on the sentinel node concept in early gastric cancer

Recent meta-analyses and a prospective multicenter trial of sentinel node (SN) mapping in early gastric cancer have demonstrated acceptable SN detection rates and accuracy of determination of lymph node status. SN mapping may play a key role in obtaining individual metastatic information. It also allows modification of surgical procedures, including function-preserving gastrectomy in patients with early gastric cancer. A dual-tracer method that uses radioactive colloids and blue dye is currently considered the most reliable method for the stable detection of SNs in patients with early gastric cancer. New technologies, such as indocyanine green infrared or fluorescence imaging, are also useful for accurate SN mapping in gastric cancer. Theoretically, laparoscopic function-preserving gastrectomy, including partial resection, proximal gastrectomy, segmental gastrectomy, and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy, is feasible in early gastric cancer when the SN(s) is/are nonmetastatic. Our study group conducted a multicenter prospective trial in Japan to evaluate function-preserving gastrectomy with SN mapping for long-term survival and patient quality of life. Non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery (NEWS) is a new technique for treating gastric cancer with partial resection involving full-thickness resection with endoscopy and laparoscopic surgery without transluminal access. The combination of NEWS and SN biopsy is expected to be a promising, minimally invasive, function-preserving surgery that is ideal for cases of cN0 early gastric cancer.     

The role of surgery in the current treatment of gastric carcinoma

Surgery currently is the only curative option in the treatment of gastric cancer. For early gastric cancer, an endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is adequate for intramucosal cancer less than 2?cm in diameter without ulcer. For early cancers ineligible for EMR, limited surgical operation (proximal gastrectomy, segmental resection, and pylorus-preserving distal gastrectomy) can be recommended to reduce surgical risk and achieve improvements in quality of life without decreasing survival. Subtotal/total gastrectomy plus D2 lymph node dissection is the standard surgery for advanced gastric cancer in Japan. Pancreas-preserving total gastrectomy is recommended due to the reduced risk of pancreatic fistula and postoperative diabetes. Regarding extended surgery, results of a phase III study to evaluate the role of paraaortic node dissection will be analyzed in a few years' time after the accrual of more than 500 patients in a Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) study. For scirrhous gastric cancer, left upper abdominal exenteration appears to be associated with improved survival and should be tested in another controlled trial.