ObjectiveTo assess the outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted surgery for treatment of advanced gastric cancer.MethodsA total of 115 patients with advanced gastric cancer were included between January 2014 and December 2018 were analyzed retroprospectively, the patients were divided into two groups: open surgery group (OS group, n=63) and laparoscopy-assisted surgery group (LAS group, n=52). Baseline characteristics, intraoperative parameters and postoperative items, and long-term efficacy were compared between the two groups.ResultsThere was no significant difference in preoperative baseline data including gender, age and preoperative serum parameters between the two groups (P>0.05). Intraoperative blood loss in the LAS group was significantly less than that in the OS group (P<0.05). In addition, the first feeding time after operation and postoperative hospital stay in the LAS group were significantly shorter than the OS group (P<0.05). Furthermore, numbers of white blood cells and neutrophils in the LAS group were fewer than that in the OS group at postoperative 2 days (P<0.05); the level of serum albumin in the LAS group was higher than that OS group (P<0.05). The number of lymph nodes detected during operation in the LAS group was more than that in the OS group (P<0.05). Operative time and occurrence of postoperative complications were not statistically significant between the two groups (P>0.05). One hundred and ten of 115 patients were followed- up, the follow-up rate was 95.7%. The follow-up time ranged from 6 to 48 months, with a median follow-up time of 12.4 months. The disease-free survival time of the OS group was 12.2±6.5 months, while that of the LAS group was 13.5±7.4 months. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsLaparoscopic technique in treatment of advanced gastric cancer has the minimally invasive advantage, less intraoperative blood loss, less surgical trauma, and faster postoperative recovery in comparing to the traditional open surgery. Also the lymph node dissection is superior to open surgery. The curative effect is comparable to that of open surgery.
Objective To evaluate safety, efficacy, and indications of laparoscopic bile duct reexploration in treatment of bile duct stones. Methods Fifty-seven patients with bile duct stones who underwent laparoscopic common bile duct reexploration (laparoscope group) and 62 patients with bile duct stones who underwent open common bile duct reexploration (laparotomy group) were included into this study from February 2013 to February 2017 in the Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. The intraoperative and postoperative data of the patients were documented and analyzed. Results All the operations were performed successfully and all the patients had no extra-damage during the operation. One case was converted to the laparotomy due to the intraabdominal serious adhesion in the laparoscope group. Compared with the laparotomy group, the amount of intraoperative blood loss was less, the first time of anal exhaust was earlier, the rates of postoperative analgesia and incision infection were lower, and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscope group, there were significant differences (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the operative time, the hospitalization expense, primary suture rate of common bile duct, and the rates of postoperative complications such as the bile leakage, bile duct stricture, and residual stone between the laparoscope group and the laparotomy group (P>0.05). Conclusion With experienced skills and strict surgical indications, laparoscopic common bile duct reexploration is safe and effective in treatment of bile duct stones, and it has some advantages including less bleeding, rapid recovery, and shorter hospitalization time.
Objective To investigate the clinical effects and safety differences of open surgery and laparoscopy primary lesion resection combined with D2 lymph node dissection in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods One hundred and forty elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer were chosen and randomly divided into two group including open operative group (70 patients) with primary lesion resection combined with D2 lymph node dissection by open operation and laparoscopic surgery group (70 patients) with primary lesion resection combined with D2 lymph node dissection by laparoscopy; and the operative time, intraoperative bleeding amount, the levels of PaCO2 in operation, liquid diet eating time, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative gastric tube indwelling time, postoperative ambulation time, the level of haemoglobin (Hb) after operation, the hospitalization time, the number of lymph node dissection, the survival rate with followed-up and postoperative complication incidence of both groups were compared. Results There was no significant difference in the operative time between 2 groups (P>0.05). The intraoperative bleeding amount, the level of PaCO2 in operation, liquid diet eating time, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative gastric tube indwelling time, postoperative ambulation time, the level of Hb after operation and the hospitalization time of laparoscopic surgery group were significantly better than open operative group (P<0.05). The level of PaCO2 in operation of laparoscopic surgery group was significantly higher than open operative group (P<0.05). There were no significant difference in the gastric lymph node dissection number and the peripheral lymph node dissection number of gastric artery between 2 groups (P>0.05). There were no significant difference in the survival rates between the 2 groups after 3-year followed-up (P>0.05). The complication incidence after operation of laparoscopic surgery group was significantly lower than open operative group (P<0.05). The quality of life scores of patients in laparoscopic surgery group were significantly higher than those in open operative group on 7 days and in 3 months after operation, and the difference were statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with open operation, primary lesion resection combined with D2 lymph node dissection by laparoscopy in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer can efficiently possess the advantages including minimally invasive, shorter recovery time and less postoperative complications.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect the case-control studies about LH vs. OH for patients with HCC from inception to December, 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 28 studies involving 1 908 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the LH group was superior to OH group on complications (OR=0.35, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.48, P<0.000 01), hospital stay (MD=–4.18, 95%CI (–5.08, –3.29),P<0.000 01), and five years overall survival rate (OR=1.65, 95%CI 1.23 to 2.19,P=0.000 7) and disease-free survival rate (OR=1.51, 95%CI 1.12 to 2.03, P=0.006). However, no significant differences were found in one year and three years overall survival rate, disease-free survival rate, and postoperative recurrence rate. Conclusion Current evidence shows that the LH is superior to OH for the treatment of HCC, and may be amenable to surgery because of its safety and longtime efficacy. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo analyze the therapeutic effects of open surgery and endovascular treatment for mesenteric venous thrombosis.MethodsThe clinical data of 22 patients with mesenteric venous thrombosis from March 2005 to January 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. One patient underwent open surgery including removal of necrotic small intestine and thrombectomy of superior mesenteric vein immediately admission to the hospital. Five cases were treated with simple anticoagulation and cured. Sixteen cases received thrombolytic therapy after primary anticoagulant therapy.ResultsOne case who underwent open surgery died of multiple organ failure at 72 h after the surgery. Five cases who received simple anticoagulant reached clinical relief finally. Sixteen patients who received thrombolytic therapy achieved recanalization totally or partially. Three cases died during follow-up (3 months to 7 years, average) of which 1 died of recurrence of acute superior mesenteric venous thrombosis, 1 died of myocardial infarction, and 1 died of stroke.ConclusionsFor patients with symptomatic mesenteric venous thrombosis, if there is no intestinal necrosis, there will be encouraging results by interventional thrombolytic therapy. And the treatment effect needs further experience accumulation in more cases.
ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness between endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) treatment and laparotomy treatment for simple common bile duct stone or common bile duct stone combined with gallbladder benign lesions. MethodsA total of 596 patients with common bile stone received ERCP (ERCP group) and 173 received open choledocholithotomy (surgical group) in our hospital between January 2009 and December 2012. Their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. The curing rate, postoperative complications, hospital stay, preoperational preparation and total cost were compared between the two groups of patients. Meanwhile, for common bile stone combined with gallbladder benign lesion, 29 patients received ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (ERCP+LC group), 38 received pure laparoscopy treatment (laparoscopy group) and 129 received open choledocholithotomy combined with cholecystectomy (surgery group). ResultsFor simple common bile stone patients, no significant difference was found in cure rate and post-operative complication between endoscopic and surgical treatment groups (P>0.05). However, total hospitalization expenses[(13.1±6.3) thousand yuan, (20.6±7.5) thousand yuan)], hospital stay[(8.91±4.95), (12.14±5.15) days] and preoperative preparation time[(3.77±3.09), (5.13±3.99) days] were significantly different between the two groups (P<0.05). For patients with common bile stone combined with gallbladder benign lesion, no significant discrepancy was detected among the three groups in curing rate and post-operative complications (P>0.05). Significant differences were detected between ERCP+LC group and surgical group in terms of total hospitalization expense[(18.9±4.6) thousand yuan, (23.2±8.9) thousand yuan] hospital stay[(9.00±3.74), (12.47±4.50) days] and preoperative preparation time[(3.24±1.83), (5.15±2.98) days]. No significant difference was found in total hospitalization expense and hospital stay, while significant difference was detected in preoperative preparation time between ERCP+LC group and simple LC group. ConclusionFor patients with simple common bile stone, ERCP is equivalent to surgery in the curing rate, and has more advantages such as less cost, shorter length of hospital stay, and lower preoperative preparation time. For the treatment of common bile duct stone with gallbladder benign disease, ERCP combined with LC also has more advantages than traditional surgery.
Objective To compare the quality of life after laparoscopic and open surgery for gastric stromal tumor patients. Methods We collected the data of the patients undergoing the gastric stromal tumor surgery from May 2011 to August 2016 in West China Hospital of Sichuan University, and compared the basic data, complications, micturition time, hospital stay time, bleeding volume and hospitalization expenses. SF-36 scale was used to evaluate the quality of life. Then, SPSS 19.0 software was used for data analysis. Results Eighty nine patients involving 31 laparoscopic patients and 58 open surgery patients were included. There was no statistical significance in basic line between two groups. The laparoscopic group had shorter micturition time and hospital stay time, less intraoperative bleeding and lower hospitalization costs, the differences between two groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). But there were no significant differences between two groups in the operation time and postoperative complication rate. The SF-36 quality of life scale of laparoscopic group and open surgery group were 737.7±68.3 and 665.1±138.1, respectively. The laparoscopic surgery group had higher scores in validity (VT), social function (SF) and mental health (MH) than those in open surgery group with significant differences (P<0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic surgery is safe and effective for the patients with stromal tumor. Patients in laparoscopic group have shorter recovery time and higher quality of life than open surgery group. Due to the limited of study design, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the effect of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) on postoperative recurrence. MethodsWe searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2015), EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases from inception to Nov. 2015, to collect relevant clinical studies comparing laparoscopy and laparotomy for BOTs. Two reviewer independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of include studies by using NOS scale. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsNineteen cohort studies were included. The scores of NOS scale showed that 10 studies were < 7 points, while the other 9 studies were≥7 points. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the recurrence rate of tumor (OR=1.75, 95%CI 1.05 to 2.91, P=0.03) in the laparoscopy group was higher than that in the laparotomy group, but no significant differences were found in further subgroup analysis according to type of operations (conservative surgery: OR=1.22, 95%CI 0.71 to 2.08, P=0.47; non-conservative surgery: OR=4.38, 95% CI 0.85 to 22.68, P=0.08). The diameter of tumor in the laparoscopy group was significant smaller than that in the laparotomy group (MD=-6.88, 95% CI-8.15 to-5.61, P < 0.000 01), and the rate of rupture of tumor in the laparoscopy group was significant higher than that in the laparotomy group (OR=3.99, 95% CI 2.54 to 6.26, P < 0.000 01). ConclusionCurrent evidence shows, compared with laparotomy, laparoscopy has similar effect on postoperative recurrence and smaller diameter of tumor, but laparoscopy could increase the rate of rupture of tumor. Due to the limited quality and sample size of included studies, more high quality and large sample size studies are need to prove the above conclusion.
Objective To compare the surgical outcome and investigate the clinic value between laparoscopic operation and laparotomy in the treatment of ectopic pregnancy. Methods We searched PubMed, EMbase, SCI, The Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China Journal Full Text Database, Chinese Medical Association Journals, and references of the included studies up to April 2009. Studies involving treatment outcome of ectopic pregnancy using laparoscopy compared with laparotomy were included. Data were extracted and methodological quality were evaluated by two reviewers independently with designed extraction form. The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.0.1 software was used for data analyses. Results A total of 11 studies involving 1795 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that laparoscopy comparing with laparotomy; the operation time and complications had no difference; intraoperative blood loss was less than laparotomy; intestinal gas exhaust and evacuation active time was earlier than laparotomy. Conclusion Laparoscopy treating for ectopic pregnancy is better than laparotomy. It is a minimally invasive surgical technique, and is worthy to be popularized.
【摘要】 目的 研究腹腔镜行进展期胃癌根治术较传统开腹手术在围手术期临床和生化指标的变化，进一步探讨其临床应用的优越性。 方法 采用统一入组标准、同期临床对比研究方法，对2010年1-12月腹腔镜手术组和开腹手术组完成的112例进展期胃癌根治术患者在围手术期临床指标和生化指标的比较分析，其中腹腔镜手术组59例，开腹手术组53例。 结果 腹腔镜组手术切口长度为（5.77±0.74） cm，开腹手术组为（12.05±1.30） cm，组间差异有统计学意义（t=-30.921，P=0.000）；腹腔镜组术中失血量为（107.20±27.23） mL，开腹手术组为（168.87±96.76） mL，组间差异有统计学意义（t=-4.483，P=0.000）；腹腔镜组术后住院时间为（7.19±0.97） d，开腹手术组为（8.32±1.16） d，组间差异有统计学意义（t=-5.634，P=0.000）；腹腔镜组手术时间为（202.12±15.71） min，开腹手术组为（196.32±16.73） min，组间差异无统计学意义（t=1.891，P=0.061）；腹腔镜组清扫淋巴结枚数（14.15±4.51）枚，开腹手术组（15.25±5.17）枚，组间差异无统计学意义（t=0.736，P=0.471）；腹腔镜组肠功能恢复时间为（57.88±9.70） h，开腹手术组为（59.16±10.82） h，组间差异无统计学意义（t=-0.655，P=0.514）。两组前白蛋白和血红蛋白水平差异无统计学意义（Pgt;0.05）。 结论 进展期胃癌行腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术比较，并不加重患者创伤反应，也不增加手术并发症，具有手术切口小、术中出血少、术后恢复快等优点。【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the differences between laparoscopy and open surgery for treating advanced gastric cancer in peri-operative clinical and biochemical indexes, in order to investigate the superiority of laparoscopy in treating the disease. Methods The same including standards and double-blind randomized control study were carried out to compare the peri-operative clinical and biochemical indexes of 112 patients who underwent radical treatment for advanced gastric cancer from January to December 2010. Among them, 59 patients were included in the laparoscopic group, and 53 in the traditional open operation group. Results Compared with the open surgery group, the incision length [(5.77±0.74) cm vs. (12.05±1.30) cm; t=-30.921, P=0.000], intraoperational blood loss [(107.20±27.23) mL vs. (168.87±96.76) mL; t=-4.483, P=0.000] and hospital stay time [(7.19±0.97) days vs. (8.32±1.16) days; t=-5.634, P=0.000] were significantly shorter or lower in the laparoscopic group. However, the operation time [(202.12±15.71) minutes vs. (196.32±16.73) minutes; t=1.891, P=0.061], number of lymph nodes removed (14.15±4.51 vs. 15.25±5.17; t=0.736, P=0.471), and intestinal functioning time [(57.88±9.70) hours vs. (59.16±10.82) hours; t=-0.655, P=0.514] were not significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the level of prealbumin and hemoglobin. Conclusion Compared with the traditional open operation, laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer has obvious advantages including smaller incision, lower blood loss during the operation, and fast recovery, without aggravating patients′ traumatic response or increasing the incidence of operational complications.