Clinical effect of laparoscopic vs conventional open abdominal surgery in the treatment of colon cancer

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2016.02.010

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the clinical effect of laparoscopic vs conventional open ab-dominal surgery in the treatment of colon cancer.

Methods

One hundred and twenty-six patients with colon cancer were divided into the study group and the control group, 63 cases in each group. Conventional open abdominal surgery was used to treat patients in the control group, and laparoscopic surgery was used in the study group. The surgery-related indicators (the operation time, intraoperative blood and the cleaning number of lymph node), postoperative recovery (exhaust time, bed-off time, liquid diet time, time stay in hospital and pain score at different postoperative time) and long-term survival of the two groups were compared.

Results

Intraoperative blood in the study group was less than the control group (P<0.05), the cleaning number of lymph node in the study group was more than the control group (P<0.05), the operation time difference of the two groups had no statistical significance. Postoperative recovery of the study group were all better than the control group (P<0.05). The long-term effect of the two groups had no statistical significance.

Conclusions

Compared with conventional open abdominal surgery in the treatment of colon cancer, laparoscopic surgery can reduce the intraoperative blood, increase the cleaning number of lymph node. It promotes the postoperative recovery, which can be widely used in clinical.

Key words: Colonic neoplasms, Laparoscopes, Comparative effectiveness research

Liangtao Luo, Haiyang Tan, Xiangyuan Yan. Clinical effect of laparoscopic vs conventional open abdominal surgery in the treatment of colon cancer[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2016, 10(02): 129-132.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2016.02.010

https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2016/V10/I02/129

Figures/Tables 4

References 15

1	朱旭,李炯,曾冬竹,等.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗结直肠癌术后肠梗阻的对比研究[J].重庆医学, 2014, 43(8): 941-942.
2	Vecchio R,Marchese S,Famoso S, et al. Colorectal cancer in aged patients. Toward the routine treatment through laparoscopic surgical approach[J]. G Chir, 2015, 36(1): 9-14.
3	阮翊,王勇,武洋,等.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗结肠癌临床对比研究[J].中国实用医药, 2012, 7(29): 100-102.
4	Yun JA,Yun SH,Park YA, et al. Oncologic outcomes of single-in-cision laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional laparos-copy for colon cancer[J]. Ann Surg, 2015 Mar 27. [Epub ahead of print]
5	吴庆平.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗低位直肠癌临床效果的比较[J].中国内镜杂志, 2014, 20(7): 752-754.
6	郑民华.腹腔镜结直肠手术的现状与未来[J/CD].中华普外科手术学杂志:电子版, 2010, 4(3): 235-239.
7	Liu M,Qu H,Bu Z, et al. Validation of the Memorial Sloan-Ket-tering Cancer Center Nomogram to predict overall survival after curative colectomy in a chinese colon cancer population[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2015, 22(12): 3881-3887.
8	李太原,张海涛,刘东宁,等.腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术与同期开腹手术近远期疗效的单中心对比研究[J/CD].中华临床医师杂志:电子版, 2014, 8(24): 4341-4345.
9	Suzuki O,Nakamura F,Kashimura N, et al. A case-matched com-parison of single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic right col-ectomy for colon cancer[J]. Surg Today, 2016, 46(3): 297-302.
10	Ito S,Ichikawa R,Kure K, et al. A Case of cecum colon cancer with lymph node metastasis successfully treated with xelox plus bevacizumab[J]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho, 2014, 41(11): 1425-1428.
11	Park EJ,Kim CW,Cho MS, et al. Is the learning curve of robot-ic low anterior resection shorter than laparoscopic low anteriorre- section for rectal cancer? a comparative analysis of clinicopatho-logic outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries[J]. Ed-icine (Baltimore), 2014, 93(25): e109.
12	吕泽坚,张育超,苏正,等.腹腔镜与开腹手术在结直肠癌治疗中的应用对比分析[J/CD].中华普通外科学文献:电子版, 2014, 8(3): 196-199.
13	Weaver K L,Grimm Jr LM,Fleshman JW. Changing the way we manage rectal cancer-standardizing tme from open to robotic (in-cluding laparoscopic)[J]. Clin Colon Rectal Surg, 2015, 28(1): 28-37.
14	吴跃锐,龚建安,梁盛枝,等.结肠癌采用腹腔镜根治术与传统开腹手术治疗的临床效果分析[J].当代医学, 2014, 21(23): 90-91.
15	Yun JA,Kim HC,Park JS, et al. Perioperative and onco-logic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopy compared with con-ventional laparoscopyfor colon cancer: an observational propensity score-matched study[J]. Am Surg, 2015, 81(3): 316-323.

组别	例数	性别［例(%)］		年龄（ ± s，岁）	瘤体大小( ± s, cm)	肿瘤部位［例(%)］
组别	例数	男	女	年龄（ ± s，岁）	瘤体大小( ± s, cm)	乙状结肠	升结肠	降结肠	横结肠
研究组	63	30(44.1)	33(52.3)	51.5±11.5	3.9±0.9	33(52.3)	14(22.2)	12(19.0)	7(11.1)
对照组	63	31(49.2)	32(50.8)	53.0±13.5	4.0±0.8	29(46.0)	12(19.0)	11(17.5)	8(12.7)
t/χ²值	?	0.0318^a		-0.390^b	-0.422^b	?	0.237^a		?
P值	?	0.858		0.679	0.674	?	0.971		?

组别	例数	性别［例(%)］		年龄（ ± s，岁）	瘤体大小( ± s, cm)	肿瘤部位［例(%)］
组别	例数	男	女	年龄（ ± s，岁）	瘤体大小( ± s, cm)	乙状结肠	升结肠	降结肠	横结肠
研究组	63	30(44.1)	33(52.3)	51.5±11.5	3.9±0.9	33(52.3)	14(22.2)	12(19.0)	7(11.1)
对照组	63	31(49.2)	32(50.8)	53.0±13.5	4.0±0.8	29(46.0)	12(19.0)	11(17.5)	8(12.7)
t/χ²值	?	0.0318^a		-0.390^b	-0.422^b	?	0.237^a		?
P值	?	0.858		0.679	0.674	?	0.971		?

组别	例数	手术时间(min)	出血量(ml)	淋巴结清扫总数（个）	淋巴结清扫数目（个）
组别	例数	手术时间(min)	出血量(ml)	淋巴结清扫总数（个）	中央组	中间组	肠旁组
研究组	63	121.7±24.4	18.8±8.5	17.2±3.0	4.5±1.3	4.9±0.9	7.8±1.4
对照组	63	127.4±23.6	50.3±27.3	13.4±2.2	1.8±0.3	4.6±1.0	7.5±1.5
t值	?	1.333	-8.744	8.107	16.063	1.770	1.161
P值	?	0.185	0.000^ab	0.000^b	0.000^ab	0.079	0.248

组别	例数	手术时间(min)	出血量(ml)	淋巴结清扫总数（个）	淋巴结清扫数目（个）
组别	例数	手术时间(min)	出血量(ml)	淋巴结清扫总数（个）	中央组	中间组	肠旁组
研究组	63	121.7±24.4	18.8±8.5	17.2±3.0	4.5±1.3	4.9±0.9	7.8±1.4
对照组	63	127.4±23.6	50.3±27.3	13.4±2.2	1.8±0.3	4.6±1.0	7.5±1.5
t值	?	1.333	-8.744	8.107	16.063	1.770	1.161
P值	?	0.185	0.000^ab	0.000^b	0.000^ab	0.079	0.248

组别	例数	排气时间(d)	下床活动时间(d)	流质饮食时间(d)	住院时间(d)	NRS评分
组别	例数	排气时间(d)	下床活动时间(d)	流质饮食时间(d)	住院时间(d)	术后1 d	术后2 d	术后3 d
研究组	63	2.1±0.4	3.6±0.6	2.2±0.7	8.6±2.0	4.5±0.9	3.0±0.9	1.8±0.4
对照组	63	3.8±0.8	5.9±1.3	4.4±1.2	11.6±2.8	11.8±2.6	4.9±1.4	3.7±1.4
t值	?	15.086	12.750	12.569	6.920	-21.059	9.061	-10.358
P值	?	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000^a	0.000	0.000^a

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export