ObjectiveTo explore the early diagnosis and treatment of acute non-tumor perforation of the back wall of ascending colon. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 17 patients with acute non-tumor perforation of the back wall of ascending colon treated between July 2007 and April 2014 in our hospital. Among them, 8 patients who underwent perforation repair combined with abdominal cavity drainage were regarded as the experimental group, and the other 9 patients who underwent operation of right hemicolectomy (or ascending colon resection) were designated as the control group. Clinical indexes and biochemical indexes of both the two groups were compared and analyzed. ResultsAll patients were cured. The operation time[(74.20±12.45), (120.23±15.20) minutes; t=-3.224, P<0.001], the intraoperative blood loss[(40.24±12.20), (80.69±18.98) mL; t=-4.114, P<0.001], the postoperative anal exhaust[(75.62±6.56), (84.54±7.82) hours; t=1.108, P=0.037], the medical expenses[(18.2±5.7) thousand yuan, (26.5±8.3) thousand yuan; t=-5.556, P<0.001], and the hypersensitive C-reaction protein on the third day after operation[(89.45±8.98), (99.85±10.78) mg/L; t=-3.004, P=0.029] in the experimental group and the control group all had significant differences. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the hospital stay time[(9.80±3.16), (9.81±3.20) days; t=1.501, P=0.080]. There was one case of incision infection in the experimental group and one case of fat liquefaction of incision in the control group, and both of them were cured after treatment. ConclusionThe early abdominal sign of perforation of the back wall of ascending colon is not obvious, which can easily lead to misdiagnosis as acute appendicitis. Early diagnosis mainly depends on the clinical symptom, vital sign, blood routine examination and CT examination. Among them, CT findings of gaseous sign behind peritoneum is a definite diagnosis, and operation should be arranged as early as possible. Perforation repair combined with abdominal cavity drainage is preferred due to its advantages of being simple, saving time, less bleeding and lighter traumatic reaction.
ObjectiveTo explore feasibility and advantages of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical resection for remnant gastric cancer. MethodsThe clinical data of 26 patients with remnant gastric cancer who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (hand-assisted group, n=13) or open (open group, n=13) radical resection from December 2007 to May 2016 in this hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The perioperative outcomes were compared between these two groups. ResultsThere was no conversion to open surgery in the hand-assisted group. Compared with the open group, the incision length was significantly reduced (P=0.000), the intraoperative blood loss was significantly decreased (P=0.038), postoperative the first anal exhaust time was significantly shortened (P=0.025) in the hand-assisted group. The operation time, the number of lymph nodes dissection, and the incidence of postoperative complications had no statistically significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionThe preliminary results of limited cases in this study show that hand-assisted laparoscopic radical resection for remnant gastric cancer is safe and feasible, it has several advantages including small incisions, mild intraoperative hemorrhage, rapid postoperative recovery, better recent clinical therapeutic outcome and so on as compared with open surgery.
ObjectiveTo analyze short-term outcomes of hand assisted laparoscopic (HAL) D2 radical distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer and summarize clinical experiences. MethodsThe clinical data of 199 patients with gastric cancer undergoing D2 radical distal gastrectomy from December 2010 to December 2013 in this hospital were analyzed. HAL (HAL group, n=92) and traditonal open (TO group, n=107) D2 radical distal gastrectomy were performed. The operation time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes harvested, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were compared between these two groups. ResultsThere was no residue of cancer cells at the surgical margin in the HAL group and the TO group. Compared with the TO group, the average incision length was obviously shorter (P < 0.01) and the average intraoperative blood loss was obviously less (P < 0.05) in the HAL group. The average operation time, the average number of lymph nodes harvested, and the average postoperative hospital stay had no significant differences between the HAL group and the TO group (P > 0.05). One case was died of unknown gastrointestinal bleeding in the HAL group and the TO group, respectively. The postoperative complication rate was 9.78% (9/92) in the HAL group and 11.21% (12/107) in the TO group, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05). ConclusionsHAL D2 radical distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer don't increase operation time. It has some advantages of minimal invasion and safety as compared with traditional open surgery.