切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华普通外科学文献(电子版)

中华普通外科学文献(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (02) : 106 -110. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2022.02.004

论著

全腹腔镜下全胃切除术后多点位固定-Overlap法和传统Overlap法疗效及安全性的对比研究
丁平安1, 王冬1,†(), 赵群1, 张志栋1, 贾楠1, 郭洪海1, 胡涛1, 崔平2, 李勇1   
  1. 1. 050011　石家庄，河北医科大学第四医院外三科
    2. 050051　石家庄，河北省人民医院医务处
  • 收稿日期:2021-10-08 出版日期:2022-04-01
  • 通信作者: 王冬
  • 基金资助:
    河北卫健委县级公立医院适宜卫生技术推广入库项目(2019024); 政府资助临床医学优秀人才培养项目(2019012); 河北省高等学校科学技术研究项目(ZD2019139)

Comparative study on the short-term efficacy and safety of multipoint fixed-Overlap method and traditional Overlap method after totally laparoscopic gastrectomy

Ping’an Ding1, Dong Wang1,†(), Qun Zhao1, Zhidong Zhang1, Nan Jia1, Honghai Guo1, Tao Hu1, Ping Cui2, Yong Li1   

  1. 1. Department of Surgery, the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050011, China
    2. Medical Service, Hebei Provincial People’s Hospital, Shijiazhuang 050051, China
  • Received:2021-10-08 Published:2022-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Dong Wang
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

丁平安, 王冬, 赵群, 张志栋, 贾楠, 郭洪海, 胡涛, 崔平, 李勇. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术后多点位固定-Overlap法和传统Overlap法疗效及安全性的对比研究[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2022, 16(02): 106-110.

Ping’an Ding, Dong Wang, Qun Zhao, Zhidong Zhang, Nan Jia, Honghai Guo, Tao Hu, Ping Cui, Yong Li. Comparative study on the short-term efficacy and safety of multipoint fixed-Overlap method and traditional Overlap method after totally laparoscopic gastrectomy[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(02): 106-110.

目的

探讨多点位固定-Overlap法（MF-Overlap）在全腹腔镜下根治性全胃切除术（TLTG）后食管-空肠吻合中的可行性及安全性。

方法

回顾性分析河北医科大学第四医院外三科2020年12月至2021年7月收治的64例采用Overlap法行TLTG胃癌患者的临床资料。依据消化道重建方式不同，分为传统Overlap组（35例）和MF-Overlap组（29例），比较两组患者手术及术后恢复情况。

结果

64例患者均顺利完成TLTG，无中转开腹及围手术期死亡。与传统Overlap组比较，MF-Overlap组总手术时间[（255.5±5.6）min vs（271.2±3.3）min，t=-3.358，P=0.012]、食管-空肠吻合时间[（42.1±3.1）min vs（53.1±5.6）min，t=-6.146，P=0.007]和术后住院时间[（6.6±2.1）d vs（7.8±2.4）d，t=-3.256，P=0.003]明显缩短，同时吻合口并发症发生率明显降低（0 vs 20.00%，χ2=6.513，P=0.011）。两组患者术中出血量、淋巴结清扫数目、肠道恢复时间及术后其他并发症率比较，差异无统计学意义。

结论

与传统Overlap法比较，MF-Overlap法用于TLTG食管-空肠吻合，可简化吻合过程，缩短手术时间，吻合安全可行，疗效较为满意。

关键词: 胃肿瘤, 全胃切除术, 食管-空肠吻合, 腹腔镜, Overlap吻合
Objective

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of multipoint fixed-overlap (MF-Overlap) in esophagojejunostomy after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG).

Methods

The clinical and pathological data of 64 gastric cancer patients with TLTG treated in the Department of Surgery, the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University from December 2020 to July 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. According to different digestive tract reconstruction methods, the patients were divided into the traditional Overlap group (35 cases) and the MF-Overlap group (29 cases), and the operation and postoperative recovery were compared between the two groups.

Results

All 64 patients successfully completed TLTG, with no conversion to open surgery or perioperative death. Compared with the traditional Overlap group, the total operation time of MF-Overlap group [(255.5±5.6) min vs (271.2±3.3) min, t=-3.358, P=0.012], esophageal-jejunal anastomosis time [(42.1±3.1) min vs (53.1±5.6) min, t=-6.146, P=0.007], and postoperative hospital stay [(6.6±2.1) d vs (7.8±2.4) d, t=-3.256, P=0.003] were significantly shortened, and the incidence of anastomotic complications (0 vs 20.00%, χ2=6.513, P=0.011) was significantly decreased. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, the number of lymph node dissection, intestinal recovery time and other postoperative complications between the two groups.

Conclusion

Compared with the traditional Overlap method, MF-Overlap can simplify the anastomosis process, shorten the operation time, and is safe and feasible for esophageal-jejunal anastomosis after TLTG with satisfactory curative effect.

Key words: Gastric neoplasms, Total gastrectomy, Esophageal-jejunal anastomosis, Laparoscopy, Overlap anastomosis
图1 MF-Overlap法操作过程　A~I详细步骤说明见内文
表1 两组全腹腔镜下全胃切除术患者一般资料比较
临床病理特征 传统Overlap组 MF-Overlap组 统计值 P值
例数 35 29    
性别(例)     χ2=0.388 0.533
  男 22 16    
  女 13 13    
年龄(岁,±s) 55.1±5.6 56.1±4.8 t=1.825 0.583
体质指数(kg/m2,±s) 21.5±2.3 22.1±1.4 t=0.642 0.262
ECOG评分     χ2=0.457 0.499
  0 30 23    
  1 5 6    
伴发病数(个)     χ2=1.287 0.257
  0~1 23 15    
  ≥2 12 14    
PG-SGA评分(分,±s) 3.4±1.8 3.1±1.6 t=3.167 0.393
Borrmann分型     χ2=0.160 0.690
  Ⅰ ~Ⅱ 20 18    
  Ⅲ~Ⅳ 15 11    
pTNM分期     χ2=1.123 0.570
  Ⅰ 12 11    
  Ⅱ 16 15    
  Ⅲ 7 3    
表2 两组全腹腔镜下全胃切除术患者术中及术后恢复情况比较（±s）
组别 例数 术中情况 术后恢复情况(d)
总手术时间(min) 食管-空肠吻合时间(min) 淋巴结清扫数目(枚) 术中出血量(ml) 术后首次下床活动时间 术后首次排气时间 术后开始进食流食时间 术后住院时间
传统Overlap组 35 271.2±3.3 53.1±5.6 29.0±8.3 98.7±42.3 2.0±0.8 3.2±2.7 5.2±1.3 7.8±2.4
MF-Overlap组 29 255.5±5.6 42.1±3.1 31.0±9.3 96.2±32.3 1.5±0.3 3.0±1.3 4.7±2.1 6.6±2.1
t值   -3.358 -6.146 -1.482 -1.874 -1.765 -2.675 -1.783 -3.256
P值   0.012 0.007 0.167 0.605 0.098 0.076 0.053 0.003
[1]
Hu Y, Huang C, Sun Y, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A randomized controlled trial[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2016, 34(12): 1350-1357.
[2]
Hyung WJ, Yang HK, Park YK, et al. Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: the KLASS-02-RCT randomized clinical trial[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(28): 3304-3313.
[3]
Liu F, Huang C, Xu Z, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic vs open total gastrectomy for clinical stage Ⅰ gastric cancer: the CLASS02 multicenter randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2020, 6(10): 1590-1597.
[4]
Umemura A, Koeda K, Sasaki A, et al. Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: literature review and comparison of the procedure of esophagojejunostomy[J]. Asian J Surg, 2015, 38(2): 102-112.
[5]
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2011, 14(2): 101-112.
[6]
Inaba K, Satoh S, Ishida Y, et al. Overlap method: novel intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2010, 211(6): e25-e29.
[7]
徐泽宽，徐皓. 全腹腔镜远端胃癌根治术消化道重建方式选择及技术要点[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2016, 36(9): 938-941.
[1] 代莉, 邓恢伟, 郭华静, 黄芙蓉. 术中持续输注艾司氯胺酮对腹腔镜结直肠癌手术患者术后睡眠质量的影响[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 408-412.
[2] 李越洲, 张孔玺, 李小红, 商中华. 基于生物信息学分析胃癌中PUM的预后意义[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 426-432.
[3] 张俊, 罗再, 段茗玉, 裘正军, 黄陈. 胃癌预后预测模型的研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 456-461.
[4] 李凯, 陈淋, 向涵, 苏怀东, 张伟. 一种U型记忆合金线在经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 15-15.
[5] 曹迪, 张玉茹. 经腹腔镜生物补片修补直肠癌根治术后盆底疝1例[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 115-116.
[6] 杜晓辉, 崔建新. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术淋巴结清扫范围与策略[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 5-8.
[7] 周岩冰, 刘晓东. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术消化道吻合重建方式的选择[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 9-13.
[8] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[9] 王春荣, 陈姜, 喻晨. 循Glisson蒂鞘外解剖、Laennec膜入路腹腔镜解剖性左半肝切除术临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 37-40.
[10] 李晓玉, 江庆, 汤海琴, 罗静枝. 围手术期综合管理对胆总管结石并急性胆管炎患者ERCP +LC术后心肌损伤的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 57-60.
[11] 甄子铂, 刘金虎. 基于列线图模型探究静脉全身麻醉腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术后肠道功能紊乱的影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 61-65.
[12] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[13] 马涛, 叶春伟, 刘滔, 彭文希, 李志鹏. 腹腔镜与开放性离断式肾盂成形术治疗小儿肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 605-610.
[14] 刘成, 赖聪, 黄健, 王建辰, 罗茜芸, 许可慰. EDGE SP1000单孔手术机器人辅助腹腔镜下猪输尿管部分切除联合端端吻合术的可行性研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 642-646.
[15] 叶晋生, 路夷平, 梁燕凯, 于淼, 冀祯, 贺志坚, 张洪海, 王洁. 腹腔镜下应用生物补片修补直肠术后盆底缺损的疗效[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 688-691.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号