腹腔镜结直肠癌切除即刻中转开腹手术的临床分析

目的 分析腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术中转开腹手术的原因.方法 回顾性分析2006-02～2010-02采用腹腔镜行结直肠癌根治手术的108例患者的资料,分析中转开腹手术15例的原因.结果 因腹腔内出血中转5例,肿瘤较低位1例,肿瘤较大2例,腹内脏器损伤2例,腹腔严重粘连3例,肥胖1例,吻合口渗漏1例.结论 腹腔镜行结直肠癌根治术具有一定的中转开腹手术率,腹腔脏器损伤和腔内出血是中转开腹的主要原因.     

腹腔镜结直肠肿瘤切除术中转开腹手术的原因分析

经腹腔镜行结直肠肿瘤切除术121例,中转开腹手术12例,原因分别为肿块术前定位不准确、肿瘤肠段切除后两断端吻合长度不够、术中出血、肥胖、输精管断裂、肿瘤与周围组织粘连难以分离各1例,骨盆狭窄、Endo-GIA切割吻合直肠残端失败、肿瘤在盆腔广泛浸润转移各2例.认为实施腹腔镜结直肠肿瘤切除术时,正确的术前评估、严格掌握手术指征、提高手术技巧将有助于避免不必要的中转开腹手术.     

老年中低位直肠癌患者手助腹腔镜与开腹直肠癌根治术的疗效比较

目的探讨手助腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术在老年中低位直肠癌患者治疗中的疗效。方法 2012年6月至2013年12月行手助腹腔镜及开腹全直肠系膜切除术治疗的老年中低位直肠癌患者80例,应用手助腹腔镜下全直肠系膜切除术治疗41例(腹腔镜组),常规开腹全直肠系膜切除术治疗39例(开腹组);对两组患者的手术学指标进行统计分析与评价。结果两组患者均顺利完成保肛手术,且无术中死亡病例,腹腔镜组无中转开腹者。腹腔镜组患者术中出血量及术后排气时间均少于开腹组(P0.05),而手术时间、淋巴结清扫个数及术后并发症比较无明显差异(P0.05)。结论手助腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术可以达到与传统开腹全直肠系膜切除术相同的疗效,相比传统开腹及全腹腔镜直肠癌根治术,手助腹腔镜直肠癌根治术在一定程度上更适合老年患者。     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中损伤肝中静脉原因分析

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中因大出血而致中转开腹的比率在1．9％以内，其中肝中静脉损伤是造成大出血的原因之一。2001年10月-2004年12月。我院收治的218例行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者中有2例出现肝中静脉大出血。现结合临床资料分析其损伤原因。     

结直肠癌患者行腹腔镜微创术中转开腹术的预后

目的分析结直肠癌患者行腹腔镜微创术中转开腹术的预后。方法选取结直肠癌患者330例,其中有中转开腹者29例(研究组),对照组为腹腔镜组,比较两组患者围术期数据和短期临床疗效。结果研究组中转开腹的原因有瘤体过大(31.03%)、过度粘连(41.38%)、肿瘤侵及邻近组织、出血过多和位置难以处理。两组手术时间无明显差异(P>0.05),研究组术中出血量和输血量明显高于对照组(P<0.05);研究组的恢复饮食所需时间、肛门开始排气时间、下床活动时间和住院时间均明显长于对照组(P<0.05);两组术后并发症发生率无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论行腹腔镜微创术中转开腹术的结直肠癌患者预后更差,主要原因为瘤体过大和过度粘连,中转开腹的患者术中失血量和近期疗效更差,因此术前做好准确的评估,再来实施更具体的治疗方式对于患者的预后更好。     

急性结石性胆囊炎腹腔镜手术252例

目的:探讨急性结石性胆囊炎腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)的手术操作要点．方法:回顾性分析本院1995-10／2005-10收治的252例胆囊结石并急性胆囊炎LC病例．结果:应用熟练的镜下操作技术,仔细解剖 Calot三角、近胆囊断离胆囊动脉、恰当处理术中出血、灵活应用电凝止血与钛夹止血相结合,顺利完成腹腔镜胆囊切除术244例,中转开腹胆囊切除术8例,系因合并胆囊癌、十二指肠球部巨大溃疡、Mirizzi综合征、胆囊壶腹部与胆总管粘连严重、胆囊十二指肠致密粘连及内瘘形成等原因而中转开腹,无术中大出血、肝外胆管损伤而中转开腹的病例．无术后胆漏、腹腔内出血等严重并发症发生．近期随访无胆管狭窄并发症发生．结论:急性胆囊炎行LC安全可行,关键是术者必须充分了解LC操作要点和熟练掌握操作技术．     

胆管端端吻合治疗腹腔镜胆囊切除术中胆总管横断伤的诊治体会

目的探讨胆管端端吻合治疗腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)中胆总管横断伤的可行性。方法回顾性分析9例LC术中胆总管横断后及时中转开腹行胆管端端吻合术的患者的资料,其中2例为大部横断,7例完全横断,8例术中发现随即中转开腹手术,1例术后次日发现再次开腹治疗。结果 9例患者均顺利完成手术,术后常规留置T管6个月,2例出现术后胆管狭窄,经内窥镜胆道球囊扩张解除狭窄,无胆瘘、出血等严重并发症的发生。结论 LC术中横断胆管后及时中转开腹行胆管端端吻合是有效的治疗方法。     

手助腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术

目的:探讨手助腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术的临床效果. 方法:应用手助腹腔镜技术(HALS)对27例结直肠癌患者行结直肠癌根治术. 结果:手术全部成功,无并发症及中转开腹手术.手术时间90-260 min,平均140 min,术中出血50-200 mL,平均110 mL.术后患者疼痛轻,病理检查淋巴结清扫及切除范围满意.肠道功能恢复时间24-60 h,平均28 h,住院时间3- 10 d,平均住院时间6.5 d,无近期复发及穿刺孔或切口种植. 结论:手助腹腔镜结直肠癌根治具有微创、安全、术后恢复快、肿瘤根治彻底等优点,值得临床推广应用.     

老年人结直肠癌患者腹腔镜与开腹手术效果的比较

结直肠癌患病率已占全部恶性肿瘤的第3位,病死率位于恶性肿瘤致死原因的第5位[1].近10余年腹腔镜结直肠癌手术发展较迅速,其疗效已得到肯定[2],与开腹手术相比,其对机体创伤及营养状况影响小,有利于患者术后康复,应用越来越广泛.腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术具有的创伤小、出血少、恢复快等优点得到广泛的认同[3].本研究对老年结直肠癌患者行腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术与开腹手术的疗效进行分析.     

腹腔镜全子宫切除术中转开腹原因分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜全子宫切除术(TLH)中转开腹的原因.方法 对587例接受TLH患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析.结果 本组TLH中转开腹率为5.79％(34/587).TLH中转开腹主要原因为子宫肌瘤位置特殊(13例,38.24％)及严重盆腔粘连(12例,35.29％),其次是术中出血(5例,14.71％)及副损伤(4例,11.76％).结论 子宫肌瘤位置特殊及严重盆腔粘连是TLH中转开腹的主要原因,不断提高腹腔镜手术技术,术前充分评估病情,严格掌握腹腔镜手术指征,可降低TLH的中转开腹率.     

Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer: A Prospective Analysis of Patient Survival and Outcomes

Purpose The role of laparoscopic resection in the management of rectal cancer is still controversial. We prospectively evaluated patient survival and outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection for rectal cancer at a single institution. Methods From November 1999 to November 2005, 107 patients with rectal cancer were treated by laparoscopy. Exclusion criteria were: metastatic disease, advanced disease with invasion of adjacent structures, clinical or radiologic involvement of the external anal sphincter, previous colonic resection, synchronous colonic adenocarcinoma, and contraindications to laparoscopy. All patients were followed prospectively for survival and complications. Survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results A laparoscopic sphincter-saving procedure was performed in 104 patients, 2 patients had a laparoscopic Miles operation, and 1 underwent a laparoscopic Hartmann’s procedure. Mean operating time was 278 (range, 135–430) minutes. Conversion to open surgery was required in 20 of 107 patients (18.7 percent). Overall morbidity was 27 percent, anastomotic leakage occurred in 14 of 104 patients (13.5 percent). There was no postoperative mortality. A mean of 18 (range, 1–49) lymph nodes was removed. Mean distance of distal margin from tumor was 2.6 (range, 0.5–10) cm; in two patients there was microscopic invasion of the distal margin. Mean hospital stay was nine (range, 4–43) days. Mean follow-up was 35.8 months. There was local recurrence in 1 of 107 patients (0.95 percent); there were no port site metastases. Actuarial five-year and disease-free survival rates are 81.4 and 79.8 percent, respectively. Conclusions Laparoscopic rectal surgery is feasible and oncologically radical but also technically demanding (conversion rate, 18.7 percent), time-consuming (mean operating time, 278 minutes), and associated with specific intraoperative complications. At present, the technique should only be performed in specialist centers by teams experienced in laparoscopic surgery. Presented at the meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Los Angeles, California, May 20 to 24, 2006.     

Conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer: What is the impact on short-term outcomes and survival?

Laparoscopic resection for colon and rectal cancer is associated with quicker return of bowel function, reduced postoperative morbidity rates and shorter length of hospital stay compared to open surgery, with no differences in long-term survival. Conversion to open surgery is reported in up to 30% of patients enrolled in randomized control trials comparing open and laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer. In this review, reasons for conversion are anatomical-related factors, disease-related-factors and surgeon-related factors. Body mass index, local tumour extension and co-morbidities are independent predictors of conversion. The current evidence has shown that patients with converted resection for colon cancer have similar outcomes compared to patients undergoing a laparoscopic completed or open resection. The few studies that have assessed the outcomes after conversion of laparoscopic rectal resection reported significantly higher rates of complications and longer length of hospital stay in converted patients compared to laparoscopically treated patients. No definitive conclusions can be drawn when converted and open rectal resections are compared. Early and pre-emptive conversion appears to have more favourable outcomes than reactive conversion; however, further large studies are needed to better define the optimal timing of conversion. With regard to long-term oncologic outcome, overall and disease-free survival in the case of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery seems to be worse than those achieved in patients in whom resection was successfully completed by laparoscopy. Although a worse long-term oncologic outcome has been suggested, it remains difficult to draw a proper conclusion due to the heterogeneity of the long-term outcomes as well as the inclusion of both colon and rectal cancer patients in most of the studies. Therefore, we discuss the currently available evidence of the impact of conversion in laparoscopic resection for colon and rectal cancer on both short-term outcomes and long-term survival.     

Predictive factors for conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery can be safely performed in the hands of well-trained surgeons, criteria for patient selection should be further developed in order to decrease the conversion rate. The main objective of this study was to identify predictive factors for conversion of laparoscopic colorectal surgery to an open procedure based on statistical analysis. METHODS: A retrospective survey was performed using data collected from 400 patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery between March 2000 and December 2006. As potential predictive factors for conversion, we considered demographic characteristics, surgery-related variables and disease-related variables. Univariable analysis was performed to identify individual predictive risk factors for conversion. Factors with p values below 0.05 were included in a regression model. RESULTS: Conversion to open surgery was required in 51 patients (12.7%). Age (>65 years) was the only independent predictive demographic factor (OR=2.3; 95% CI, 1.25-4.46). Low anterior resection (OR=3.9; 95% CI, 1.64-9-18) and complicated diverticulitis (OR=3.9; 95% CI, 1.64-9.18) were also predictive factors. The only predictive factor evidenced in the multivariate analysis was complicated diverticulitis (OR=159.99; 95% CI, 41.02-624.02). Indications for conversion were: adhesions in 53% of the patients, technical problems in 18%, bleeding in 1%, and other indications for the remaining 28%. CONCLUSION: Complicated diverticulitis or cancer of the rectum treated by low anterior resection have higher probabilities of conversion.     

3D与2D腹腔镜直肠癌根治术近期疗效的Meta分析

目的系统评价3D与2D腹腔镜在直肠癌根治术的近期临床疗效。 方法计算机检索PubMed、The Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Embase、CNKI、WanFang和VIP国内外数据库中比较3D与2D腹腔镜直肠癌根治术近期疗效的文献,并搜集相关文献的参考文献,检索时间从数据库建立至2019年3月1日。运用Review Manager 5.2软件对相关指标进行Meta分析。 结果最终纳入11个研究,包含2个随机对照研究（RCT）,9个非RCT,共1 169例患者纳入分析,其中3D腹腔镜组601例,2D腹腔镜组568例。3D腹腔镜组术中出血量（P<0.00001）、手术时间（P<0.00001）、首次排气时间（P<0.0001）、住院时间（P=0.04）、并发症发生率（P=0.04）、淋巴结获取数目（P<0.00001）均优于2D腹腔镜组,差异有统计学意义。两组中转开腹、环周切缘（CRM）阳性率比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。手术时间的漏斗图提示无发表偏倚（P=0.693）。 结论与2D腹腔镜直肠癌手术相比,3D腹腔镜同样能够达到直肠癌根治性切除,且具有手术时间短、术中失血量少、术后并发症低、住院时间短、清扫淋巴结数目多等优势。     

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) vs. radical surgery (RS) in the treatment of rectal cancer: indications, limitations, prospectives. A review

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Principal goal in the management of any patient with rectal cancer is to provide an optimal chance for cure while maintaining their quality of life. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a minimal invasive procedure that allows full thickness local excision or rectal tumors. The role or TEM in the treatment of rectal cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to review the evidence related to the role of TEM compared to radical surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed 5 studies (two controlled randomized and three non-randomized) comparing outcome after TEM vs. radical surgery (RS), either open or laparoscopic, in patients with rectal cancer. We evaluated the results in terms of safety of the procedure as well as its efficacy. RESULTS: Hospital stay, complication rate and overall morbidity and mortality were lower in the TEM groups in all studies. With the exception of one study, recurrence was slightly (but non-significantly) increased in the TEM groups. No difference for T2 tumors with TEM vs. laparoscopic resection was seen though. Overall survival was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: TEM is a safe, effective minimal invasive method for treatment of T1 rectal carcinomas and possibly T2 carcinomas in selected patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Its role in advanced tumor stages should be further defined.     

腹腔镜TME联合ISR对低位直肠癌的疗效及对患者控便功能的影响

目的探讨腹腔镜下全直肠系膜切除术（TME）联合经肛门内括约肌间切除术（ISR）对低位直肠癌的治疗效果及肛门控便功能的影响。 方法选取宜昌市第二人民医院手术治疗的低位直肠癌患者159例,收集时间为2014年1月至2017年1月,根据手术方式不同分为腹腔镜组69例（腹腔镜下TME＋ISR手术）、开腹组90例（采用传统开腹手术实施TME＋ISR手术治疗）,对比两组的手术相关指标及术后肛门控便功能。 结果腹腔镜组的手术时间、清扫淋巴结数目与开腹组比较差异均无统计学意义（t=1.209,1.585;P<0.05）;腹腔镜组患者的手术出血量、肛门排气时间及住院时间均小于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义（t=13.834,5.930,6.556;P<0.05）;腹腔镜组术后肛门控便功能显著的优于开腹组,差异具有统计学意义（Z=-2.183,P=0.029）;术前,两组患者的肛管收缩压（t=1.381,P=0.397）、肛管最大收缩时间（t=1.047,P=0.297）及肛管静息压（t=0.483,P=0.495）差异均无统计学意义;术后3个月,腹腔镜组患者的肛管收缩压、肛管最大收缩时间及肛管静息压显著高于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义（t=3.571,5.188,3.448;P<0.05）。腹腔镜组患者手术并发症率为7.25%,显著低于开腹组患者的17.78%（χ²=4.003,P=0.045）。 结论腹腔镜下TME联合ISR对低位直肠癌的治疗效果良好,并且具有创伤小、术后患者肛门功能恢复好的优点。     

Rare cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding owing to hepatic cancer invasion: A case report

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding refers to bleeding that arises from the gastrointestinal tract proximal to the ligament of Treitz. The primary reason for gastrointestinal bleeding associated with hepatocellular carcinoma is rupture of a varicose vein owing to pericardial hypotension. We report a rare case of gastrointestinal bleeding with hepatocellular carcinoma in a patient who presented with recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. The initial diagnosis was gastric cancer with metastasis to the multiple lymph nodes of the lesser curvature. The patient underwent exploratory laparotomy, which identified two lesions in the gastric wall. Total gastrectomy and hepatic local excision was then performed. Pathological results indicated that the hepatocellular carcinoma had invaded the stomach directly, which was confirmed immunohistochemically. The patient is alive with a disease-free survival of 1 year since the surgery. Hepatocellular carcinoma with gastric invasion should be considered as a rare cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in hepatocellular carcinoma patients, especially with lesions located in the left lateral hepatic lobe. Surgery is the best solution.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中转开腹手术的原因分析

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LC）中转开腹手术的原因。方法采用回顾性分析的方法对30例LC中转开腹手术原因进行统计分析。结果中转开腹手术的原因中，手术部位解剖关系不清16例（53．3％），解剖结构异常6例（20．0％），胆囊床广泛渗血不止4例（13．3％），胆囊动脉出血3例（10．0％），肝外胆管损伤1例（3．3％）。结论腔镜手术操作困难时应及时中转开腹手术，以获得最好的远期疗效。术前仔细评估，严格腹腔镜手术指征，术中仔细精准的解剖定位，可以降低中转开腹手术率。     

Intraoperative laparoscopic liver ultrasonography for staging of colorectal cancer

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility of intraoperative laparoscopic ultrasonography (ILUS) to completely scan all anatomic segments of the liver through a single port site during laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. METHODS: ILUS was performed in patients who were undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery using the following approach: 1) presence of a radiologist in the operating room; 2) introduction of the probe through a single cannula site; 3) standardized sequence of four probe positions on liver surface; 4) identification of all major vascular/biliary hepatic structures as a guideline to scan all parenchymal segments of the liver. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients who were undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery were prospectively enrolled. Computed tomography (CT) scan films were available for an immediate comparative analysis in the first 12 cases. Mean duration of the procedure was 10 (range, 5–15) minutes. All major vascular and biliary structures were identified in all patients. Sixteen focal abnormalities were identified by ILUS, and ten focal abnormalities were identified by CT scan in the same seven patients. In one patient, detection of a suspected metastasis not seen by preoperative CT scan led to conversion of the surgical procedure to a laparotomy. CONCLUSIONS: ILUS is a safe and expeditious technique that permits scanning of all anatomic liver parenchyma segments through a single cannula site. Because intraoperative palpation of the liver is not possible during laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery, ILUS should probably be a standard component of the curative laparoscopic colorectal cancer operation.     

Robot-assisted one-stage resection of rectal cancer with liver and lung metastases

The Da Vinci Surgical System may help to overcome some of the difficulties of laparoscopy for complicated abdominal surgery.The authors of this article present a case of robot-assisted, one-stage radical resection of three tumors, including robotic anterior resection for rectal cancer, segmental hepatectomy for liver metastasis, and wedge-shaped excision for lung metastasis.A 59-year-old man with primary rectal cancer and liver and lung metastases was operated upon with a one-stage radical resection approach using the Da Vinci Surgical System.Resection and anastomosis of rectal cancer were performed extracorporeally afterundocking the robot.The procedure was successfully completed in 500 min.No surgical complications occurred during the intervention and postoperative period, and no conversion to laparotomy or additional trocars were required.To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of simultaneous resection for rectal cancer with liver and lung metastases using the Da Vinci Surgery System to be reported.The procedure is feasible and safe and its main advantages for patient are avoiding repeated operation, reducing surgical trauma, shortening recovery time, and early implementation of postoperative adjuvant therapy.