肛提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术治疗低位直肠癌

传统的腹会阴联合直肠切除术存在环周切缘阳性率高及术中穿孔率较高而影响预后的缺点,肛提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术可克服这些缺点．但该术式存在操作复杂、创伤大和并发症多等缺点。通过近几年的临床研究．国内外学者对该术式的适应证、手术方式改良及并发症的防治有了更加深入的认识。本文就经胍提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术的特点、手术适应证、研究进展及相关并发症的防治进行讨论。     

��λֱ���������������ʽ����ؼ��⸹���������г���

腹会阴联合切除术(APE)和全直肠系膜切除(TME)明显改善了直肠癌病人的预后。然而,与直肠癌前切除手术(AR)相比,低位直肠癌的环周切缘(CRM)阳性率和术中穿孔(IOP)的发生率仍然很高,这是导致复局部发率高的重要因素。提肛肌外腹会阴联合切除术(ELAPE)可明显降低CRM阳性率和IOP发生率,增加局部根治性。在欧洲,ELAPE被认为是治疗低位直肠癌的外科新理念。ELAPE手术要求在会阴区沿提肛肌外侧平面操作,腹部手术遵循TME原则。明确解剖标志和操作原则可缩短外科医生的学习曲线。     

经肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除术与传统腹会阴联合切除术对低位直肠癌疗效比较的Meta分析

目的系统比较经肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除术（ELAPE）与传统腹会阴联合切除术（APE）对低位直肠癌的治疗效果。方法计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、PubMed、EMbase、中国知网和维普等数据库中以低位直肠癌为研究对象、并设有ELAPE与APE对照的临床研究文献,采用Cochrane系统评价方法对两种术式的术中穿孔率、环周切缘阳性率、术后局部复发率及术后会阴切口并发症发生率进行Meta分析。结果共6篇文献（1篇随机对照研究和5篇非随机对照研究）656例病例纳入研究,其中ELAPE组346例,APE组310例。Meta分析结果显示,ELAPE组环周切缘阳性率（RR=0．48,95％CI：0．36-0．65）和局部复发率（RR=0．43,95％C1：0．19-0．99）明显低于APE组;而两组患者术中穿孔率（RR=0．45,95％CI：0．15-1．37）和术后会阴切口并发症发生率（RR=I．20,95％CI：0．57-2．50）的差异无统计学意义。结论相较于传统APE术,ELAPE术具有更低的环周切缘阳性率和局部复发率。     

���ἡ�⸹���������г������Ƶ�λֱ������Ҫ�Լ���Ӧ֤��̽��

??Re-discussion on the necessity and surgical indication of extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer YAO Hong-wei*??LI Wen-di??LIU Yin-hua. *Department of General Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
Corresponding author: LIU Yin-hua, E-mail: liuyinhua@medmail.com.cn
Abstract The extralevator abdominoperineal excision??ELAPE??through the anatomical plane outside the levator meets with the holy plane of total mesorectal excision to ensure the integrity of the surgical specimen. The rates of positive circumferential resection margin and intra-operative perforation were decreased by extended resection of levator. In recent years, in the field of colorectal surgery a debate was risen that if ELAPE can replace abdominoperineal resection (APR). How to determine the indication of ELAPE? How to improve perineal incision complications of ELAPE? And how to determine the survival benefit of ELAPE? Along with the related research, ideas gradually clear. For low rectal cancer staging cT1-2 or ycT0-2, APR procedure is still the standard operation. In the absence of a high level of evidence based medicine, it’s too early to say that ELAPE can replace APR. Tumor staging ycT3-4 after neoadjuvant treatment is more suitable for ELAPE. The reduction of local recurrence rate and benefit of long-term survival is looked forward to.     

经盆腔途径肛提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术36例

目的评价对经肛提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术（ELAPE）的腹组操作进行改良——即在腹部操作过程中经盆腔途径直视下切断肛提肌治疗低位直肠恶性肿瘤的安全性、可行性及临床疗效。方法2010年1月到2013年3月,福建医科大学附属协和医院结直肠外科对36例低位直肠恶性肿瘤（距肛缘小于或等于5cm）患者行腹腔镜（26例）或开放（10例）手术中经盆腔途径行ELAPE术,术中可根据肛提肌受累情况个体化决定肛提肌切除范围：会阴部操作时无需翻转患者体位。总结该改良术式的初步应用结果。结果除开放手术者术中发生1例直肠穿孔外。其余患者术中均未发生相关并发症及中转手术。手术时间为（220．9±36．8）min,术中出血量为（121．6±99．7）ml。所有标本切断的肛提肌均附着在直肠系膜上,标本的环周切缘阳性率为5．6％（2／36）。术后随访2—27月,未见肿瘤复发或转移。结论经盆腔途径肛提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术操作简单、术中可个体化决定肛提肌切除范围、手术时间短和近期肿瘤学效果好。     

Abdominosacral Amputation of the Rectum for Low Rectal Cancers: Ten Years of Experience

Background  Abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer is related to the high frequency of local recurrences, risk of inadvertent bowel perforation, and disease-positive tumor margin. An alternative technique to this procedure, however, is the abdominosacral amputation of the rectum (ASAR). The aim of this study was to report on the technique and share our experience of ASAR on the cohort of consecutively operated patients. Methods  In its anterior stage, ASAR follows the rules of total mesorectal excision. In its posterior part, the patient is positioned in a prone jackknife position and the coccyx and the last sacral vertebra (if necessary) are removed, enabling a sharp and directly visualized resection of the tumor and other structures critical to local recurrence. Between 1998 and 2007, a total of 210 low-rectal cancer patients were so treated at our clinic. Results  Bowel perforation occurred in 9 patients, the circumferential resection margin was positive in 16 patients, and 38 patients had local wound complications. Seven (4.4%) of 158 patients with 2-year follow-up developed local recurrence, whereas 5-year observed and relative survivals were 68.3% and 73.2%, respectively. Conclusions  ASAR has a low risk of bowel perforation, circumferential resection margin involvement, and local wound complications. The local recurrence rate is lower and survival better than with conventional abdominoperineal resection.     

柱状（经肛提肌外）腹会阴联合切除术治疗低位进展期直肠癌

针对传统腹会阴联合切除术治疗卣肠癌术后局部复发率较高的缺点．近年来提出了柱状腹会阴联合切除术（CAPR）的手术方法,也称为经肌提肌外腹会阴联合切除术。从目前研究来看,该术式可以降低直肠癌手术的环周切缘阳性率和肿瘤穿孔率,降低术后局部复发牢,从而可能提高患各的生存率。随着研究的深入,出现了一些热点问题,如盆底的重建方法、会阴部手术操作的体位、腹腔镜技术的联合应用、术后的会阴疼痛以及术后泌尿生殖神经损伤的并发症等。在临床实践和解剖学研究的基础上提出的个体化CAPR技术有望在保证根治性的前提下,减少患者创伤,降低术后并发症的发生。     

Outcome of extralevator abdominoperineal excision compared with standard surgery: results from a single centre

Aim Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal tumours has been introduced to achieve improved local radicality. Fewer positive margins and intraoperative perforations have been reported compared with standard APE. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare short‐term complications and results of the two techniques in our institution. Method Consecutive patients with rectal cancer undergoing APE between 2004 and 2009 were included. They were divided into two groups of 79 patients in extralevator APE and 79 in standard APE. Patients with recurrence and those having a palliative procedure were excluded. Data were collected from hospital records and the colorectal cancer registry. Main endpoints were wound infection, perineal wound revision, oncological data and length of hospital stay. Results Circumferential resection margin positivity did not differ significantly between groups (17% extralevator APE; 20% standard APE). Intraoperative perforation (13%vs 10%) or local recurrence (seven in each group) were no different. Perineal wound infection was more common after extralevator APE (46%vs 28%, P < 0.05) as was perineal wound revision (22%vs 8%, P < 0.05). Hospital stay was longer after extralevator APE (median 12 vs 11 days, P < 0.05). Tumour height (median 4 cm) and pTNM classification did not differ. Conclusion The results do not show any advantage for extralevator APE. The oncological data were no better and postoperative morbidity was increased. Further studies are needed before extralevator APE is widely adopted in clinical practice.     

��ؼ��⸹���������г����ڵ�λֱ���������еij���Ӧ��

目的探讨经提肛肌外腹会阴联合切除术(extralevator abdom inoperineal excision,ELAPE)在低位直肠癌手术中的初步应用结果。方法回顾性分析2011年9月至2012年4月北京大学人民医院胃肠外科7例接受ELAPE的低位直肠癌病人的临床资料。结果 7例病人平均手术时间280min,平均出血量150mL,术中未发生医源性肠管穿孔,切除标本均无"外科腰",术后会阴切口延迟愈合1例,肠梗阻1例。结论 ELAPE治疗低位直肠癌安全可行,可降低术中穿孔发生率、可能降低环周切缘阳性率,短期随访预后良好,有望成为治疗进展期低位直肠癌的推荐术式。     

���ܱ��ص�ֱ�����������ƽ�չ������

大规模的临床研究显示,传统直肠癌腹会阴联合切除术[abdominoperineal excision,APE;或称为abdominalperineal resection(APR)]环周切缘(circumferencial resection margin,CRM)阳性率较高和手术中穿孔率较高是其术后局部复发率高和病人存活率低的重要原因。因此,其作为不能保留肛门的低位直肠癌的手术治疗金标准逐渐受到挑战。直肠癌柱状腹会阴联合切除(cylindrical abdominoperineal excision,CAPE)即直肠癌肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除(extral levator abdominoperineal excision,ELAPE)手术能够显著降低直肠癌手术后环周切缘阳性率及局部复发率,且不增加手术打击,使其可能成为传统APE以外的一个新选择。应进一步验证该手术的长期疗效和病人生活质量,同时应制订手术规范,更好地保护植物神经和采用个体化的手术方案。     

肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除术的研究进展

腹会阴联合切除术（APE）和全直肠系膜切除术（TME）明显改善了直肠癌患者的预后。然而,与直肠癌前切除术相比,低位直肠癌的环周切缘（CRM）阳性率和术中穿孔（IOP）的发生率仍然很高。经肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除术（ELAPE）可以降低直肠癌手术的CRM阳性率和肿瘤穿孔率,降低术后局部复发率,从而可能提高患者的生存率。然而,术中操作时间长、创伤大和术后会阴并发症发生率高,使ELAPE备受争议。本文对ELAPE的操作要点、优缺点、研究现状和发展前景等进行综述。     

Can the results of anorectal (abdominoperineal) resection be improved: are circumferential resection margins too often positive?

Carefully executed surgery for rectal cancer has reduced the incidence of local recurrence after restorative resection. Three recent large prospective series have confirmed the perception of a higher positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate after abdominoperineal resection. Tumour spread is different for low tumours and the surgical technique of abdominoperineal resection, perhaps better known as anorectal excision, may vary between surgeons. There is a need to redefine the place of anorectal excision and the contribution that can be made by pre-operative chemoradiation and/or extended surgery to reduce local recurrence and increase survival. Defined surgery, validated by histopathological assessment, as applied to TME surgery, would determine whether the perceived higher rates are due to the differences in routes of tumour spread or to surgically related variables. Unnecessary R1 or R2 resections and operative perforation can be minimized by an understanding of the surgical anatomy, the pattern of spread and difference in operative technique between anorectal excision and a low restorative operation. Surgical technique to maximize R0 resection should be based on a detailed understanding of the pelvic fascia and the levator ani and the use of pre-operative imaging to define lines of excision. With the adoption of even lower restorative resection (intersphincteric) there is a need to reassess the method of anorectal excision. This may be achieved by histopathological assessment of CRM positivity and MDT audit to improve results. Clinical trials are essential.     

中低位直肠癌环周切缘的规范化检测及研究进展

随着TME技术和术前新辅助治疗的推广,直肠癌的预后在逐步改善.环周切缘（CRM）是目前直肠癌预后的重要影响因素之一.CRM阳性将导致预后不良.明确CRM阳性的不同种类、定义和影响因素有现实意义.直肠癌病理学中的TME质量控制和CRM判断的标准非常重要.完整切除肛提肌的扩大经腹会阴联合切除术（APR）即柱状APR较传统APR在降低CRM阳性率方面可能有一定优势.     

中低位直肠癌环周切缘的规范化检测及研究进展

随着TME技术和术前新辅助治疗的推广,直肠癌的预后在逐步改善.环周切缘(CRM)是目前直肠癌预后的重要影响因素之一.CRM阳性将导致预后不良.明确CRM阳性的不同种类、定义和影响因素有现实意义.直肠癌病理学中的TME质量控制和CRM判断的标准非常重要.完整切除肛提肌的扩大经腹会阴联合切除术(APR)即柱状APR较传统APR在降低CRM阳性率方面可能有一定优势.     

Inadvertent perforation during rectal cancer resection in Norway

BACKGROUND: Inadvertent perforation of the bowel or tumour is a relatively common complication during resection of rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to examine intraoperative perforation following the introduction of mesorectal excision as a standard surgical technique in Norway. METHODS: This was a prospective national cohort study of 2873 patients undergoing major resection of rectal carcinoma at 54 Norwegian hospitals from November 1993 to December 1999. RESULTS: The overall perforation rate was 8.1 per cent (234 of 2873 patients). In a multivariate analysis, the risk of perforation was significantly greater in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (odds ratio (OR) 5.6 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 3.5 to 8.8)) and in those aged 80 years or more (OR 2.0 (95 per cent c.i. 1.2 to 3.5)). The 5-year local recurrence rate was 28.8 per cent following perforation, compared with 9.9 per cent in patients with no perforation (P<0.001); survival rates were 41.5 and 67.1 per cent respectively (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The risk of intraoperative perforation was significantly greater in patients with rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection and in those aged 80 years or more. The high local recurrence rates and reduced survival following perforation call for increased attention to avoid this complication.     

��λֱ�������ἡ�⸹���������г���ѧϰ�����о�

??Analysis of the learning curve for extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer??Lessons from a single center`s experience GAO Zhi-dong??WANG Chao??SHEN Zhan-long??et al. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery??Peking University People’s Hospital??Beijing 100044??China
Corresponding author??YE Ying-jiang??E-mail??yeyingjiang@pkuph.edu.cn
Abstract Objective To evaluate the learning curve of extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) for rectal cancer. Methods The clinical data of 55 patients with rectal cancer performed ELAPE at Peking University People`s Hospital between June 2012 and October 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. A cumulative sum (CSCUM) analysis was used to derive the learning curve. The differences between the learning phase and the proficient phase in surgical effects were analyzed retrospectively. Results The cumulative sum analysis revealed the degree of proficiency increased after 30 cases. Compared with learning phase??30 cases????the operative time [??246.6±51.1??min vs.??286.3±43.2??min]??intraoperative blood loss[??146.9±76.0??mL vs.??215.7±162.9??mL]??postoperative dieting time [??6±1??d vs.??7±2??d] in proficient phase (25 cases) decreased significantly respectively (P<0.05). The hospital stay [??19±8??d vs.??18±9??d]??lymph nodes harvest [??17±6??vs.??17±9??]??operation-related complications incidence (24.0% vs. 40.0%)?? positive circumferential resection margin (4.0% vs.3.3%)??intraoperative perforation incidence (0 vs. 6.7%) and the quality of specimens had no any statistical significance (P>0.05). Conclusion The learning process for ELAPE has a greater effect on the first 30 cases.     

Laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision of the rectum

In laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection of the rectum (LAP-AP) an abdominal incision is completely avoided as the tumor is delivered through the perineal incision. It is our belief that the view provided in the pelvis by laparoscopy is significantly better than at laparotomy and allows excellent anatomical definition and meticulous dissection. In this study we compared the adequacy of excision of the first 12 patients undergoing LAP-AP to the last 16 patients undergoing open abdominoperineal resection (OP-AP). In all patients the procedure was carried with curative intent for adenocarcinoma and the Dukes staging and Jass score's were similar in both groups. The data demonstrate similar nodal harvest in both groups as well as extent of radial excision. However, two patients in the open group had microscopic radial margin involvement despite being macroscopically clear at surgery. We conclude that although long-term follow-up is required to address the issue of local cancer recurrence, laparoscopic rectal dissection appears as good as open surgery and may allow a more precise assessment of excision margins.     

ֱ�����и��ἡ�⸹���������г����о���չ

??Progress of extralevator abdominoperineal excision for advanced low rectal cancer WANG Zhen-jun, HAN Jia-gang. Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hosptial, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China
Corresponding author:WANG Zhen-jun,E-mail: wang3zj@sohu.com
Abstract Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE), has been described as a method for improving the outcome of advanced low rectal cancer, probably because of more pelvic dissection and less positive circumferential resection margin (CRM). However, ELAPE might result in a significantly increased rate of perineal wound complications, urinary and sexual dysfunction and chronic perineal pain. Several studies suggest that ELAPE is not associated with deterioration in quality of life when compared with conventional APR. Individual ELAPE has the potential to reduce the risk of chronic perineal pain and sexual dysfunction without influenced the radical effect. Biologic meshes using in perineal reconstruction significantly reduce the operative time, length of stay in hospital and the cost per patient. Laparoscopic or robotic assistance enables ELAPE with acceptable perioperative and pathological outcomes. Although several studies show no benefit for ELAPE regarding oncological outcomes, ELAPE is still a milestone operation based on accurate surgery principle.     

Extended abdominoperineal resection with gluteus maximus flap reconstruction of the pelvic floor for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative tumour perforation, positive tumour margins, wound complications and local recurrence are frequent difficulties with conventional abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer. An alternative technique is the extended posterior perineal approach with gluteus maximus flap reconstruction of the pelvic floor. The aim of this study was to report the technique and early experience of extended APR in a select cohort of patients. METHODS: The principles of operation are that the mesorectum is not dissected off the levator muscles, the perineal dissection is done in the prone position and the levator muscles are resected en bloc with the anus and lower rectum. The perineal defect is reconstructed with a gluteus maximus flap. Between 2001 and 2005, 28 patients with low rectal cancer were treated accordingly at the Karolinska Hospital. RESULTS: Two patients had ypT0 tumours, 20 ypT3 and six ypT4 tumours. Bowel perforation occurred in one, the circumferential resection margin (CRM) was positive in two, and four patients had local perineal wound complications. Two patients developed local recurrence after a median follow-up of 16 months. CONCLUSION: The extended posterior perineal approach with gluteus maximus flap reconstruction in APR has a low risk of bowel perforation, CRM involvement and local perineal wound complications. The rate of local recurrence may be lower than with conventional APR.     

直肠癌行肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除术研究进展

肛提肌外腹会阴联合切除术（ELAPE）是治疗低位进展期直肠癌的重要术式。近年来,ELAPE手术方式和技术在逐渐发展,其突出的优点是手术简单、精准、根治性有所提高。腹腔镜和机器人手术系统行ELAPE亦取得肯定效果。多数研究认为,ELAPE降低了环周切缘阳性率、肿瘤穿孔发生率,并可能进一步降低局部复发率和提高存活率。由于切除了更多的肿瘤周围组织,ELAPE可能会增加术后会阴部伤口并发症、泌尿生殖功能障碍和骶尾部慢性疼痛的发生,但有关生活质量研究认为,ELAPE术后病人总体生活质量与传统经腹会阴联合切除术（APR）无显著差别。个体化ELAPE手术可能降低术后并发症发生率。应用生物补片重建盆底有助于缩短住院时间,减少住院花费。笔者认为,ELAPE从理念上强调了沿肛门外括约肌-提肛肌外侧筋膜平面切除的重要性,尽可能保留坐骨直肠窝脂肪,以解剖学基础指导手术,符合肿瘤根治的精准原则。