目的:比较低位直肠癌几种术式的复发率及5年生存率的差异,探讨术式的选择。方法:收集我院2001～2008年收治268例低位直肠癌病例资料,按局部切除,TME+DIXON、TME+MILES分成三组,对术后复发率及5年生存率进行回顾分析。结果:局部切除组12例,2年局部复发2例,复发率16.%,TME+DIXON组192例,总保肛率84.%,2年复发45例,复发率16.%,5年生存率61.%,TME+MILES术64例,2年复发11例,复发率17%,5年生存率59%,三组病例2年复发率相近,统计学数据显示无显著性差异(Pgt;0.5)。结论:对低位直肠癌,可根据病灶大小,病理学类型,Dukes分期等把握术式选择的适应症:保肛术式为首选, Miles术为最后的选择。
目的:探讨胃癌术后复发的临床特点及再手术适应症。方法:回顾性分析我院2000年1月至2009年1月收治的46例复发性胃癌再次手术病例的临床资料。结果:术中探查发现30例侵及毗邻器官,16例淋巴结转移,术后生存5年以上1例、3年以上18例、1年以上3例、1年以内死亡15例。结论:术后定期胃镜检查有助于复发性胃癌的早期诊断和提高手术率。选项择身体素质好、肿瘤复发局限者采取再次手术治疗,可延长生存时间,提高疗效。
目的:探讨老年结直肠癌并急性肠梗阻的处理原则和方法。方法:回顾性分析10年间收治的78例(70～80岁)结直肠癌并急性肠梗阻的临床资料。78例中Dukes B期20例,C期18例,D期40例。全部患者经手术治疗,包括急诊手术46例,择期性手术32例。采用右半结肠一期切除肠吻合治疗30例,左半结肠一期切除吻合40例。Hartmann 5例, Di×on手术2例,肿瘤近端肠管造瘘1例。结果:术后出现并发症16例(20.5%)21例次,包括切口感染14例次,腹腔感染5例次和吻合口瘘2例次,死亡3例(3.85%),75例(96.2%)痊愈出院。结论:对于急性结直肠癌性梗阻除非有急诊手术指征,应首先采用非手术治1～2 d,尽可能转为择期手术;一期切除吻合治疗结直肠癌并发急性梗阻,是方便可行而安全有效的方法,加强围手术期处理是手术成功的关键。
ObjectiveTo evaluate the short-term effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) by meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched for manuscripts about RDP versus LDP form PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CKNI, CBM, and WanFang Databases. The parallel quality assessment was selected according to the literature inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted and meta-analysis was performed by using Revman 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 23 articles were included, and a total of3 487 patients enrolled who underwent pancreatic body resection. Meta-analysis results showed that compared with the LDP group, the RDP group had a longer operation time [MD=15.52, 95%CI was (0.60, 30.45), P=0.04], but the intraoperative blood loss was less [MD=–59.18, 95%CI was (–111.62, –6.73), P=0.03], the intraoperative spleen preservation rate was higher [OR=1.74, 95%CI was (1.02, 2.96), P=0.04], the intraoperative conversion to open rate was lower [ OR=0.45, 95%CI was (0.34, 0.60), P<0.000 01], and postoperative hospital stay was shorter [MD=–0.90, 95%CI was (–1.70, –0.10), P=0.03], while there were no significant differences in intraoperative blood transfusion rate [OR=0.88, 95%CI was (0.60, 1.30), P=0.52], incidence of postoperative overall complication [OR=0.88, 95%CI was (0.68, 1.13), P=0.32] and pancreatic leakage [OR=0.91, 95%CI was (0.72, 1.14), P=0.41], 90-day readmission rate [OR=1.32, 95%CI was (0.95, 1.83), P=0.10], and 90-day reoperation rate [OR=0.73, 95%CI was (0.40, 1.33), P=0.30].ConclusionsRDP has the advantages of less bleeding, low turnover rate, and short postoperative hospital stay. However, due to the quality limitations of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality studies.
ObjectiveTo investigate safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in municipal hospitals.MethodsThe clinic data of patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy in the Leshan People’s Hospital from November 2017 to January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into LPD group and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) group according to the operation methods, and the indicators of perioperative safety and effectiveness of the two groups were compared.ResultsA total of 72 patients were enrolled in this study, including 30 patients in the LPD group and 42 patients in the OPD group. There were no significant differences in the age, gender, and other baseline indicators between the two groups (P>0.05). Although the operative time of the LPD group was longer than that of the OPD group (P<0.05), the intraoperative blood loss in the LPD group was significantly less than that in the OPD group (P<0.05), the postoperative hospital stay, postoperative exhaust time, and postoperative ambulation time in the LPD group were shorter than those in the OPD group (P<0.05). And there were no significant differences in the terms of intraoperative red blood cell transfusion, intraoperative blood transfusion rate, postoperative ICU hospitalization time, hospitalization expenses, overall complications and specific complications (except incision infection rate of LPD group was significantly lower than OPD group, P=0.031) between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in the positive rate of resection margin, number of lymph node dissection, and positive rate of lymph node between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionLPD has the same safety and effectiveness as OPD in the perioperative period in municipal hospitals, and is more conducive to postoperative recovery of patients.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical value of laparoscopic cholecystectomy following “A-B-D” approach applied in the operation of acute suppurative or gangrenous cholecystitis.MethodsWe sought out 45 patients diagnosed as acute suppurative or gangrenous cholecystitis and treated by laparoscopic cholecystectomy following the “A-B-D” approach in People’s Hospital of Leshan from Sep. 2019 to Dec. 2020 as the observation group (ABD observation group), and sought out 50 patients with the same diseases but treated by conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from Jun. 2018 to Aug. 2019 as the matched group (conventional matched group). We analyzed and compared the parameters related to safety and efficacy of the two groups retrospectively.ResultsA total of 95 patients were included, including 45 patients in the ABD observation group (26 cases of acute suppurative cholecystitis, 19 cases of acute gangrenous cholecystitis) and 50 patients in the conventional matched group (24 cases of acute suppurative cholecystitis, 26 cases of acute gangrenous cholecystitis). There were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, disease composition, gallbladder condition, and preoperative complications between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no bile duct injury case in the ABD observation group (0), while there were 4 cases (8.0%) in the conventional matched group, but the statistical results showed no statistical significance between the two groups (P=0.054). One case (2.2%) in the ABD observation group converted to laparotomy, which was significantly lower than the 10 cases (20.0%) in the conventional matched group, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.017). In addition, there were no significant differences for other parameters including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, incidences of intraoperative bleeding and postoperative bleeding between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsThe laparoscopic cholecystectomy following the “A-B-D” approach can help distinguish the anatomical structure of cystic duct and extrahepatic bile duct clearly, and it can help prevent biliary tract injury effectively and reduce the probability of conversion to laparotomy. It is worthy of clinical application and promotion, especially in the majority of county hospitals.