Objective To compare the effect of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery on the blood coagulation state in patients with gastric cancer, and to provide evidence for the prevention measurement of thrombosis in perioperative period. Methods One hundred patients with gastric cancer who received treatment in our hospital from Feb. 2014 to Aug. 2014, were randomly divided into laparoscopy group and laparotomy group, 50 patients in each group. The patients in laparotomy group were treated by traditionally open surgery, while patients in the laparoscopy group accepted laparoscopic surgery. The clinically therapeutic effect of 2 groups was compared. Results ① Operative indexes. The operation time, blood loss, anal exhaust time, hospital stay, and morbidity of laparoscopy group were all lower than those of laparotomy group (P<0.05). ② Coagulation function. Compared with preoperative indexes, the prothrombin time (PT) at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group and laparotomy group were both shorter (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and international normalized ratio (INR) between the 2 time points (before operation and 24 h after operation) in both 2 groups (P>0.05). Both at 2 time points (before operation and 24 h after operation), there was no significant difference in PT, APTT, and INR between 2 groups (P>0.05). ③ Fibrinolysis indexes. Compared with preoperative indexes, the fibrinogen (FIB) and D-dimer at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group and laparotomy group were higher (P<0.05). The FIB and D-dimer at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group were both higher than those of laparotomy group (P<0.05). ④ Follow-up results. There was no significant difference in metastasis rate, recurrence rate, and mortality between the 2 groups (P>0.05), but the incidence of thrombus was higher in laparoscopy group than that of laparotomy group (P<0.05). Conclusions In the treatment of patients with gastric cancer, laparoscopic surgery has the advantages of less trauma, less blood loss, less complications, and so on. Laparoscopic surgery and open surgery both can lead to hypercoagulable state, but the effect of laparoscopic surgery is stronger than open surgery.
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.
Objectives To analyze risk factors associated with conversion to open surgery of laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer. Methods From January 2009 to December 2014, 235 patients underwent laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer in the Chengdu 5th Hospital, were enrolled in this study. These patients were divided into laparoscopic repair group (n=207) and conversion to open surgery group (n=28). The characteristics, clinical outcomes, and prognosis factors were compared between these two groups. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the critical cutoff value for diameter and duration of perforation for predicting conversion to open surgery. Results There were no significant differences of the age, gender, body mass index, comorbidity, history of ulcer, smoking history, history of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs or steroids use, history of alcohol use, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification on admission, white blood cell count on admission, C reaction protein on admission, surgeons, suture method, and location of perforation between these two groups (P>0.05). The patients in the conversion to open surgery group had a higher procalcitonin (PCT) level on admission (P=0.040), longer duration of peroration (P<0.001), larger diameter of peroration (P<0.001), longer hospital stay (P=0.002), higher proportion of patients with Clavien-Dindo classification Ⅰ and Ⅱ (P<0.001), longer gastrointestinal function recovery time (P=0.003), longer analgesics use time (P<0.001), and longer off-bed time (P=0.001) as compared with the laparoscopic repair group. The results of logistic regression analysis showed that the peroration duration on admission〔OR: 2.104, 95%CI (1.124, 3.012),P=0.020〕and peroration diameter on admission〔OR: 2.475, 95%CI (1.341, 6.396),P=0.013〕were two predictors of conversion to open surgery. For the diameter of perforation, 8.0 mm was the critical cutoff value for predicting conversion to open surgery by ROC curve analysis, the sensitivity was 76%, the specificity was 93%, and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.912. For the duration of perforation, 14 h was the critical cutoff value to predict conversion to open surgery, the sensitivity was 86%, the specificity was 71%, and theAUC was 0.909. Conclusions The preliminary results in this study show that diameter of perforation of 8 mm and duration of perforation of 14 h are two reliable risk factors associated with conversion to open surgery for perforated peptic ulcer. Also, PCT level would mightbe considered as a helpful risk factor for it.
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.
Objective To summarize the clinical therapeutic efficacy of emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy （LC） and emergent open cholecystectomy （OC）. Methods One hundred and thirty-three patients with acute cholecystitis from March 2011 to June 2012 in this hospital were randomly divided into emergent LC （ELC） group and emergent OC （EOC） group. The examination and treatment before and after operation were the same. The clinical data before and during operation， postoperative complications， and recovery conditions were observed and compared. Results There was no obvious difference of the clinical data before operation between the ELC group and EOC group （P＞0.05）. Also， there were no significant differences of the operation time， biliary duct injury rate， postoperative bleeding rate， and reoperation rate in two groups （P＞0.05）. The time of postoperative anal exsufflation， time of out-of-bed activity， and postoperative hospital stay in the ELC group were significantly shorter than those in the EOC group （P＜0.05）， the poor incision healing rate in the ELC group was significantly lower than that in the EOC group （P＜0.05）， and the intraoperative blood loss in the ELC group was significantly less than that in the EOC group （P＜0.05）. Conclusions ELC as compared with EOC， are less intraoperative blood loss， less postoperative complications， more rapid recovery， and do not increase operation time. In a hospital with skilled LC technique， ELC is safe and feasible， has obvious advantages of minimal invasion.
Objective To analyze the treatment and effect of bacterial liver abscess over the past two decades in one single center. Methods The total 198 patients with bacterial liver abscess during the last twenty years were studied retrospectively. They were divided into three groups according time: 1989-1995 group, 1996-2002 group and 2003-2008 group. Gender and age of patient, location, number and size of abscesses, treatment, hospital days, morbidity of complications and mortality among the groups were compared. Results There were 54, 69, 75 cases in 1989-1995, 1996-2002 and 2003-2008 group respectively. No significant differences were found in gender and age of patient, location, number and size of abscess among three groups （Pgt;0.05）. In 1989-1995 group, 35 cases (64.8%) were treated with laparotomy, 8 cases (14.8%) with laparoscope, and 11 cases (20.4%) with percutaneous treatment (needle aspiration or catheter drainage). In 1996-2002 group, 15 cases (21.8%) were treated with laparotomy, 21 cases (30.4%) with laparoscope, 31 cases (44.9%) with percutaneous treatment (needle aspiration or catheter drainage), and 2 cases (2.9%) were treated with antibiotherapy. In 2003-2008 group, 5 cases (6.7%) were treated with laparotomy, 13 cases (17.3%) with laparoscope, 54 cases (72.0%) with percutaneous treatment (needle aspiration or catheter drainage), and 3 cases (4.0%) were treated with antibiotherapy. The constituent ratio of treatment was significantly different among three groups (P＜0.05). The hospital days was (18.5±12.2) d, (16.4±12.8) d and (20.1±14.6) d, the morbidity of complications was 9.3% (5/54), 4.3%(3/69) and 4.0%(3/75), the mortality was 3.7%(2/54), 1.4%(1/69) and 1.3% (1/75) respectively, but there were no significant differences of three indexes among three groups. Conclusion With the development of surgical techniques, effective antibiotic therapy and percutaneous treatment (needle aspiration or catheter drainage) have been the main therapeutic methods, and laparoscopy and laparotomy are necessary supplement.
Objective To assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic resection for gastric stromal tumors. Methods The Literature published before November of 2010 was searched in PubMed, EMbase, Wiley Online Library, MEDLINE, CNKI, VIP, and CBM to identify the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs about laparoscopic versus open resection for gastric stromal tumors. The literature was screened according to the inclusive and exclusive criteria by two reviewers independently, and the methodology quality was evaluated after abstracting the data, then the RevMan 5.0 software was used for Meta-analyses. Results Four quasi-RCTs and eight CCTs involving 496 patients were included. The results of Meta-analyses showed that, compared with the open resection surgery, the laparoscopic resection surgery significantly reduced the hospitalization duration (MD= –2.81, 95%CI –4.51 to –1.11), and the incidence of recurrence and metastasis (OR=0.36, 95%CI 0.13 to 1.01). No significant differences were found between the two groups in operation time, amount of bleeding, postoperative first flatus and oral intake, and total complication rate (Pgt;0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic resection surgery is safe to treat the patients with gastric stromal tumors, which may reduce the hospitalization duration and the incidence of recurrence and metastasis. Due to the poor quality and small sample size of included trials, more well-designed RCTs should be performed.
ObjectiveTo compare the results of laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative resection and open surgery for gasric stromal tumor. MethodsFrom January 2010 to March 2015, the clinical data of 56 cases undergoing laparoscopic resection for gasric stromal tumor and 53 cases of traditional operation selected during the same period were retrospectively compared. ResultsThere was no significant difference between two groups in patient's gender, age, body weight, size of tumor, tumor staging, method of operation, intraoperative conditions, postoperative overall complications, local recurrence, and distant metastasis. There were 1 case with the rupture of tumor and 1 case of open surgery transforming in laparoscopic group. In another group, there was the absence of the rupture of tumors. There was no mortality, stomach bleeding, stenosis or leakage occurred between two groups. In laparoscopic group, there were less operative blood loss and abdominal drainage, shorter time of postoperative anal exhaust time, fewer anodyne, a reduction of hospital stay than in convention operation group.However, laparoscopic resection required greater hospital costs and longer operative time. There were significant differences between two groups (P < 0.05). Conciusions With advantages of less blood loss and quicker recovery as compared to conventional operation. Laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative resection for gasric stromal tumor has similar effect when it is performed by well selection of cases, skilled surgeon with experience on open resection for surgical treatment of gastric stromal tumor.