腹腔镜与开腹全胃切除术治疗Ⅰ期胃癌的近期疗效对比CSCD

目的探讨腹腔镜全胃切除术与传统开腹全胃切除术对Ⅰ期胃癌的近期疗效。方法回顾性分析89例肿瘤位于近端胃的Ⅰ期胃癌,并且行全胃切除术的患者。按照手术方式不同分为腹腔镜组(47例)和开腹组(42例)。通过观察两组患者手术时间、出血量、术后病理相关指标、术后并发症、术后首次进食流质饮食时间及术后住院天数,比较两种手术方式的近期疗效。结果两组患者基线资料对比差异无统计学意义,具有可比性。与开腹组相比,腹腔镜组患者手术时间更长,但术中出血量、术后首次进食流质饮食时间、术后住院天数、术后并发症发生率及并发症等级均低于开腹组(P<0.05)。结论腹腔镜全胃切除术能够在保证Ⅰ期的近端胃癌患者手术安全性的同时,降低患者术中出血量、进食流质饮食时间、术后住院时间及术后并发症。     

腹腔镜辅助D2根治性全胃切除术与传统开腹手术治疗胃癌的近期疗效及血清学变化比较

目的 探讨腹腔镜辅助D2根治性全胃切除术与传统开腹手术治疗胃癌的近期疗效及血清学变化.方法 选取118例胃癌患者,依照患者意愿和手术需求分为腹腔镜组(n=59)和开腹组(n=59).腹腔镜组行腹腔镜辅助D2根治性全胃切除术,开腹组行传统开腹全胃切除术,比较两组患者的术中、术后指标及血清学变化.结果 腹腔镜组患者的手术时间长于开腹组,术中出血量少于开腹组,切口长度短于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.05);两组患者的淋巴结清扫数目比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05).腹腔镜组患者术后肛门排气时间、开始进食流质时间、开始进食半流质时间和住院时间均短于开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05).术后72 h,两组患者的肝肾功能指标ALT、AST、ALB、BUN及炎症相关指标WBC、NE、CRP比较,差异均无统计学意义(P﹥0.05),但腹腔镜组患者的Cr水平高于开腹组,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05).结论 腹腔镜辅助D2根治性全胃切除术治疗胃癌不仅安全有效,而且创伤小,术后患者恢复快,值得临床推广应用.     

腹腔镜辅助与开腹根治性全胃切除术近远期疗效对比

目的:通过比较腹腔镜辅助根治性全胃切除术与开腹根治性全胃切除术近远期疗效差异，探讨腹腔镜辅助根治性全胃切除术的临床应用价值。方法:总结从2013年6月到2015年12月在西安交通大学第一附属医院普通外科诊断为胃腺癌或黏液腺癌并行根治性全胃切除129例患者临床病例资料，将患者分为腹腔镜组与开腹组，通过比较两组患者术后近期疗效、手术相关指标、术后病理指标及远期疗效，比较两种手术疗效差异。结果:两组患者一般资料及病理资料无统计学差异。与开腹组相比腹腔镜组术中出血量明显减少、术后住院时间明显减低、术后总体并发症发生率降低，并且术中术后输血率降低，而开腹组手术时间低于腹腔镜组，住院总花费也低于腹腔镜组。两组患者术后总生存率与无病生存率相同。结论:腹腔镜辅助根治性全胃切除术是安全可行的，与开腹手术相比，其具有微创、术后恢复快的特点，并且两组患者远期疗效一致，值得临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜和开腹胃癌根治术治疗胃癌合并慢性阻塞性肺病的临床疗效及安全性评价

目的 探讨腹腔镜和开腹胃癌根治术治疗胃癌合并慢性阻塞性肺病的临床疗效及安全性评价.方法 选取胃癌合并慢性阻塞肺病患者90例,根据患者意愿将其分为两组,每组45例,腹腔镜组患者接受腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术治疗,开腹组患者接受开腹胃癌根治术.比较两组患者的手术情况和术后并发症的发生情况.结果 腔镜组患者的切口长度显著短于开腹组患者(P＜0.05);腔镜组患者的手术时间显著长于开腹组(P＜0.05),腔镜组患者术中出血量显著少于开腹组(P＜0.05),术中淋巴结的清扫数量显著多于开腹组(P＜0.05);腔镜组患者术后使用镇痛泵的使用次数显著少于开腹组患者(P＜0.05);腔镜组患者术后肛门排气时间和住院时间显著短于开腹组(P＜0.05);腔镜组患者术后下床活动时间显著早于开腹组患者(P＜0.05).腔镜组肺部并发症发生率为15.67%,显著低于开腹组为60.00%(P＜0.05);腔镜组患者腹部并发症发生率为15.67%,显著低于开腹组的42.22%(P＜0.05).结论 腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术治疗胃癌合并慢性阻塞性肺病的临床疗效显著,有利于患者术后恢复,有效降低患者术后发生腹部和肺部并发症的发生率,值得临床推广应用.     

腹腔镜辅助小切口胃癌根治术对进展期胃癌患者手术相关指标及术后胃肠功能恢复的影响

目的 研究腹腔镜辅助小切口胃癌根治术对进展期胃癌患者手术相关指标及术后胃肠功能恢复的影响。方法 选择进展期胃癌患者96例作为观察对象，按随机数字表法分成2组，各48例。对照组行传统的开腹胃癌根治术治疗，研究组行腹腔镜辅助小切口胃癌根治术。对比两组临床疗效、手术相关指标、术后胃肠道功能恢复情况及并发症发生率。结果 研究组治疗总缓解率高于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组手术操作时间、术中淋巴结清扫数量对比，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);研究组术中出血量较对照组更少，术后住院时间较对照组更短，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);研究组术后胃肠功能恢复效果较对照组更优，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);研究组术后并发症总发生率较对照组更低，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 腹腔镜辅助小切口胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的效果确切，能有效清除肿瘤病灶，且存在术中出血量低、术后并发症发少等优势，有利于术后胃肠功能尽早恢复，可于临床推广。     

新辅助化疗联合腹腔镜治疗进展期胃癌的近期疗效分析

目的:比较腹腔镜和开腹手术联合XELOX方案新辅助化疗治疗进展期胃癌的近期疗效.方法:对120例进展期胃癌患者在接受XELOX方案新辅助放化疗后,根据患者意愿分为腹腔镜手术组(68例)和开腹手术组(52例),比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、淋巴结清扫数目、肿瘤距切缘距离、术后胃肠功能恢复时间、术后住院日和近期并发症发生率.结果:120例患者接受XELOX方案新辅助化疗后客观有效率为58.3％、临床获益率为86.7％;与开腹组比较,腹腔镜组手术时间延长,但术中出血量减少、术后胃肠功能恢复时间和术后住院日缩短,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05);而淋巴结清扫数目、肿瘤距切缘距离以及术后并发症发生率差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论:进展期胃癌行XELOX方案新辅助化疗后行腹腔镜手术,术后恢复快,同时在淋巴结清扫方面与开腹手术有相同的效果.     

腹腔镜辅助根治性全胃切除术与近端胃切除术在贲门癌中应用的近期疗效对比

目的 腹腔镜辅助根治性全胃切除术与近端胃切除术治疗贲门癌的短期疗效比较.方法选择2015年1月到2016年2月在本院行腹腔镜贲门癌根治术的患者46例,其中根治性全胃切除术式组(全胃切除组)26例,根治性近端胃切除术式组(近端胃切除组)20例,比较两组术中情况、术后近期并发症、术后生活质量.结果两组手术时间、术中出血量、切口长度、首次排气时间、术后拔除引流管时间、术后住院时间、进流食时间、术后吻合口瘘、吻合口出血、吻合口狭窄、肠梗阻比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);近端胃切除组患者的反流性食管炎发生率较全胃切除组高(P<0.05);全胃切除组患者在整体健康状况、情绪功能、呃逆等维度的生活质量评分优于近端胃切除组(均P<0.05).结论对比腹腔镜近端胃切除术,腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术在治疗贲门癌中能够获得更好的近期生活质量.     

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。     

腹腔镜辅助下胃癌D2根治术150例疗效评价

目的探讨腹腔镜辅助下胃癌D2根治术的可行性及疗效。方法回顾分析150例(2010年5月至2014年8月)腹腔镜辅助下胃癌D2根治术(LAG组)以及同期150例传统开腹胃癌手术(OG组)的临床资料。比较两组患者的术中及术后情况、淋巴结清扫数目、并发症发生率等。结果两组手术时间、切口长度、肛门排气时间、鼻饲流质时间、术后住院天数有明显差别(均P<0.05);淋巴结清扫数目、转移数目、术中出血量、消化道重建方式、肿瘤浸润深度、肿瘤与上下切缘距离及肿瘤最大径则无统计学差异(均P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜辅助下胃癌根治术具有安全、术后恢复快等优点,同时在淋巴结清扫方面能达到开腹胃癌手术相同的效果。     

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。     

腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治81例分析

[目的]比较腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治与腹腔镜辅助胃癌全胃切除的临床资料,探讨腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术的可行性及安全性.[方法]回顾性分析接受腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治病例81例的临床资料,其中LADG组58例行腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌切除,LATG组23例行腹腔镜辅助全胃切除.[结果]与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治相比,腹腔镜辅助全胃切除组手术时间统计学延长.术中出血量、术中并发症发生率均增加,但是差异无统计学意义.胃肠功能恢复时间、术后引流管拔除时间、术后住院时间均无统计学差异.[结论]腹腔镜辅助全胃切除手术难度相对较大,术中并发症发生率高,但是总体安全可行,可在条件成熟,腔镜胃癌技术娴熟的技术上逐步开展.     

The endoscopic evaluation of gastritis,gastric remnant residue,and the incidence of secondary cancer after pylorus-preserving and transverse gastrectomies

Background Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) and transverse gastrectomy (TrG) have been accepted as function-preserving procedures for node-negative early gastric cancer. It is believed that a better quality of life is guaranteed after PPG or TrG compared to that after distal subtotal gastrectomy (DSG) with Billroth type-I reconstruction. However, objective evaluations of the gastric remnant following gastrectomy have not been widely reported, and the real advantages and disadvantages of PPG or TrG over DSG remain unclear. Moreover, the risk of secondary cancer after PPG or TrG is uncertain.Methods Between 1991 and 2000, 834 DSGs were carried out in our institute for preoperatively diagnosed patients with early gastric cancer. The degree of residual gastritis and the amount of diet residue in the gastric remnant were evaluated by annual gastrointestinal endoscopic investigations prospectively for 72 patients after PPG, 95 patients after TrG, and 60 patients after DSG. These analyses were performed using the RGB classification (residue, gastritis, bile). The incidence of disease greater than or equal to grade 2 was calculated, and the time trends of the incidence for each procedure were also studied for 3 years after gastrectomy. In addition, secondary cancer cases in the gastric remnant mucosa were checked for each procedure during this period, and the incidence of secondary cancer after each operation was calculated.Results The incidence of gastritis, of grade 2 or more, found in the gastric remnant was significantly lower after PPG (1.4%) and TrG (2.1%) than after DSG (43.3%). However, the incidence of moderate or greater residue in the gastric remnant, grade 2 or more, was significantly higher after PPG (45.8%) and TrG (40.0%) than after DSG (11.7%). The analysis of time trends of gastritis and diet residue reflected the significant advantage or disadvantage for each procedure 1 year after surgery. The analysis also included these factors without consideration of elapsed time following surgery. Two patients after PPG (2.8%) and three patients after TrG (3.2%) developed secondary cancer in the gastric remnant. No DSG-treated patient showed new cancer genesis in the remaining stomach.Conclusion PPG and TrG have the advantage over DSG in preventing postoperative gastritis in the gastric remnant. On the other hand, moderate or greater diet residue in the gastric remnant is more common after PPG or TrG than after DSG. For the risk of carcinogenesis in the remnant gastric mucosa, we could not conclude that there was any apparent difference between these range-limited gastrectomies and conventional DSG. Further study is necessary to determine the significant advantages and disadvantages of using PPG or TrG.     

全胃切除术和近端胃切除术治疗贲门癌的临床疗效对比

目的比较全胃切除术和近端胃切除术治疗贲门癌的临床疗效。方法将56例贲门癌确诊患者随机分为2组,分别给予全胃切除术和近端胃切除术治疗,每组28例,并进行3年随访。评估2组患者的围手术期指标、术后并发症发生情况、远期营养情况和远期生存率,并进行统计学分析。结果全胃切除组患者和近端胃切除组患者围手术期指标及术后并发症发生率之间无统计学差异(P>0.05),但全胃切除组的胃肠道症状评分均显著小于近端胃切除组的胃肠道症状评分(P<0.05)。2组患者术后1年的营养情况之间无统计学差异(P>0.05),均存在较大比例的营养不良和营养不良风险。2组患者术后1年生存率之间无统计学差异(P>0.05),但全胃切除组患者的3年生存率显著高于近端胃切除组患者的3年生存率(P<0.05)。结论与近端胃切除术相比,全胃切除术治疗贲门癌临床效果更好,术后胃肠道恢复较好且术后3年生存率较高。     

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BackgroundThis study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer in a tertiary referral center in Hong Kong.MethodsTwo hundred and ninety-four consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy with curative intent between January 2008 and December 2015 were analyzed. Data was prospectively collected and reviewed. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare the OG and LG groups.ResultsAfter propensity score matching, operation duration (294.7 vs 231.8min, P < 0.01) was significantly longer while estimated blood loss (191.6 vs 351.0 ml, P = 0.01) was significantly less in LG group compared with OG. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications and mortality between LG and OG groups (postoperative complication rate, 35.2% vs 40.7%, P = 0.69; 90-day mortality rate, 1.9% vs 3.7%, P = 1.00). Three-year OS and 3-yr DFS of patients who underwent LG was not inferior to that of patients who had OG (P = 0.34; P = 0.51). However, there were significantly more peritoneal recurrences among the OG group than LG group (P < 0.01).ConclusionsLG has comparable outcomes for gastric cancer, even in advanced tumors. We could appropriately increase the proportion of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.     

Surgical and oncological outcomes of distal gastrectomy compared to total gastrectomy for middle-third gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Distal gastrectomy (DG) and total gastrectomy (TG) are the most common types of radical surgery for patients with middle-third gastric cancer (MTGC). However, the indications and benefits of the two procedures still remain controversial. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of DG and TG in the treatment of MTGC. A rigorous literature review was performed in the databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese BioMedical Literature to retrieve studies published up to February 2022. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of included studies and a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. A total of 12 retrospective studies performing comparisons of DG and TG were included in the present meta-analysis. For patients who underwent DG, a lower rate of overall post-operative complications, anastomosis leakage and intro-abdominal infection was determined. No significant difference was observed between DG and TG in the 5-year overall survival when the proximal resection margin ranged from 3 to 5 cm. Although DG was associated with a higher 5-year overall survival rate when compared to TG, there was no significant difference in the stratified analyses by TNM stage. In conclusion, the prognosis of MTGC did not depend on the extent of gastrectomy. With lower complications and acceptable oncological outcomes, DG was a safe and feasible surgical procedure for MTGC when a negative proximal margin was confirmed.     

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy as a valid procedure to treat gastric cancer option both in early and advanced stage: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Although laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) compared to open total gastrectomy (OTG) has been widely used for advanced gastric cancer patients, its oncologic validity is yet to be proven. We performed systemic review and meta-analysis to compare LTG versus OTG for early and advanced stages of gastric cancer. Short- and long-term outcomes of both procedures were analyzed using original studies collected by searching Google Scholar, Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. To analyze procedures more precisely, we categorized studies into advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and early gastric cancer (EGC) groups and matched lymph node (LN) dissection, and metastasis ratio. Nineteen studies with a total of 3943 patients were included. LTG required more operative time and had less dissected LNs, indicating a favorable quality of OTG. However, LTG was superior with less blood loss, a shorter postoperative hospital stay, and lower postoperative complication rates. The 5-year survival rate was similar in both groups in which extent of LN dissection and lymph node metastasis ratio were controlled. Although more LNs were removed in OTG, the discrepancy had an insignificant impact on the survival rate. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to employ quantitative synthesis in evaluation of long-term oncologic validity of LTG and OTG in AGC, with LN dissection and N stage controlled setting. Non-inferiority of LTG on oncologic outcome and superiority of LTG on perioperative outcome lead to a conclusion that LTG has potential as a valid treatment modality in AGC.     

Comparison of totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic assisted gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer

BackgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and laparoscopic surgery have been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer, however, the feasibility and safety of totally laparoscopic gastrectomy after NACT still remain unknown.Materials and methodsAt the Gastrointestinal cancer center of Peking university cancer hospital and institute in Beijing, clinical and pathological data of patients who has received NACT, followed by radical laparoscopic gastrectomy was retrospectively reviewed between March 2011 and November 2019. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether intracorporeal anastomosis or extracorporeal anastomosis had been performed, short-term outcomes (post-operative recovery index and complications) and economic cost were compared between 2 groups.ResultAll of 139 patients underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy. 87 [62.6%] patients had totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) and 52 [37.4%] patients had laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG). Overall complication rate was 28.8% in all patients. TLG group was significantly associated with lower overall complication rate (21.8% VS 40.4%; p = 0.019) and major complication rate (3.4% VS 13.5%; p = 0.001) compared with LAG group. Overall cost was similar (p = 0.077). In subgroup analysis, totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) group showed lower overall postoperative complication rate (19.0% VS 56.5%; p = 0.011), as well as marginal significant differences in major complication (0% VS 21.7%; p = 0.05) than laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) group. Earlier first liquid diet (4 [3.5–5] day VS 6 [4–6.5] day; p = 0.047), earlier first aerofluxus (3 [3-4] day VS 4 [3–4.5] day; p = 0.02) and a shorter hospital stay (9 [8-12] day VS 12 [10-15] day; p = 0.004) were observed in TLTG group. Overall and major complication rate were similar in totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) and laparoscopic assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) group (22.7% VS 27.6%; p = 0.611; 4.5% VS 6.9%; p = 0.639; respectively). Significant differences were found between TLDG and LADG groups regarding time to first liquid diet (4 [3-5] day VS 6 [3.75–6] day; p = 0.006), time to first aerofluxus (3 [3–3] day VS 4 [3-6] day; p< 0.001), time to first defecation (4 [4-5] day VS 5 [4-6] day; p = 0.045), time to remove all drainage (7 [6-8] day VS 8 [6-9] day; p = 0.021), white blood cell count on postoperative Day 1 (9.54 ± 2.49 10⁹/L VS 10.91 ± 2.89 10⁹/L; p = 0.021)and postoperative hospital stay (9 [8-10] day VS 10 [9,13] day; p = 0.009).ConclusionFor patients with Locally advanced gastric cancer who received NACT, totally laparoscopic gastrectomy, including TLTG and TLDG, doesn’t increase complications and overall cost compared with LAG, and has advantages in gastrointestinal function recovery, incision length and postoperative hospital stay.     

腹腔镜胃癌根治术与传统开腹手术在早期胃癌治疗中的应用效果比较

目的探讨腹腔镜胃癌根治术与传统开腹手术在早期胃癌治疗中的应用效果。方法依据手术方式将279例早期胃癌患者分为腹腔镜组(n=142)和开腹组(n=137),腹腔镜组患者接受腹腔镜胃癌根治术治疗,开腹组患者接受开腹胃癌根治术治疗。比较两组患者的围手术期相关指标、血清学指标[血清癌胚抗原(CEA)、糖类抗原19-9(CA19-9)、C反应蛋白(CRP)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)]、生活质量和术后并发症发生情况。结果腹腔镜组患者手术时间明显长于开腹组患者,切口长度、首次进食时间、首次通气时间、首次排便时间、首次下床活动时间、住院时间均明显短于开腹组患者,术中出血量明显低于开腹组患者,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.01)。术后1天,两组患者血清CEA、CA19-9、CRP水平均低于本组术前,血清IL-6水平均高于本组术前,且腹腔镜组患者血清CRP、IL-6水平均低于开腹组患者,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。术后6、12个月,两组患者欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生命质量测定量表(EORTC QLQ-C30)量表评分均高于本组术前,且腹腔镜组患者EORTC QLQC30量表评分均高于开腹组患者,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。腹腔镜组患者术后并发症总发生率为5.63%,低于开腹组患者的13.87%,差异有统计学意义(P﹤0.05)。结论腹腔镜胃癌根治术与传统开腹胃癌根治术治疗早期胃癌的疗效相当,但腹腔镜手术更具微创性,有利于促进胃癌患者的术后恢复,降低术后炎性应激反应和并发症发生率,可提高患者的生活质量。