Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect the case-control studies about LH vs. OH for patients with HCC from inception to December, 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 28 studies involving 1 908 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the LH group was superior to OH group on complications (OR=0.35, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.48, P<0.000 01), hospital stay (MD=–4.18, 95%CI (–5.08, –3.29),P<0.000 01), and five years overall survival rate (OR=1.65, 95%CI 1.23 to 2.19,P=0.000 7) and disease-free survival rate (OR=1.51, 95%CI 1.12 to 2.03, P=0.006). However, no significant differences were found in one year and three years overall survival rate, disease-free survival rate, and postoperative recurrence rate. Conclusion Current evidence shows that the LH is superior to OH for the treatment of HCC, and may be amenable to surgery because of its safety and longtime efficacy. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
【摘要】 目的 研究腹腔镜行进展期胃癌根治术较传统开腹手术在围手术期临床和生化指标的变化，进一步探讨其临床应用的优越性。 方法 采用统一入组标准、同期临床对比研究方法，对2010年1-12月腹腔镜手术组和开腹手术组完成的112例进展期胃癌根治术患者在围手术期临床指标和生化指标的比较分析，其中腹腔镜手术组59例，开腹手术组53例。 结果 腹腔镜组手术切口长度为（5.77±0.74） cm，开腹手术组为（12.05±1.30） cm，组间差异有统计学意义（t=-30.921，P=0.000）；腹腔镜组术中失血量为（107.20±27.23） mL，开腹手术组为（168.87±96.76） mL，组间差异有统计学意义（t=-4.483，P=0.000）；腹腔镜组术后住院时间为（7.19±0.97） d，开腹手术组为（8.32±1.16） d，组间差异有统计学意义（t=-5.634，P=0.000）；腹腔镜组手术时间为（202.12±15.71） min，开腹手术组为（196.32±16.73） min，组间差异无统计学意义（t=1.891，P=0.061）；腹腔镜组清扫淋巴结枚数（14.15±4.51）枚，开腹手术组（15.25±5.17）枚，组间差异无统计学意义（t=0.736，P=0.471）；腹腔镜组肠功能恢复时间为（57.88±9.70） h，开腹手术组为（59.16±10.82） h，组间差异无统计学意义（t=-0.655，P=0.514）。两组前白蛋白和血红蛋白水平差异无统计学意义（Pgt;0.05）。 结论 进展期胃癌行腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术比较，并不加重患者创伤反应，也不增加手术并发症，具有手术切口小、术中出血少、术后恢复快等优点。【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the differences between laparoscopy and open surgery for treating advanced gastric cancer in peri-operative clinical and biochemical indexes, in order to investigate the superiority of laparoscopy in treating the disease. Methods The same including standards and double-blind randomized control study were carried out to compare the peri-operative clinical and biochemical indexes of 112 patients who underwent radical treatment for advanced gastric cancer from January to December 2010. Among them, 59 patients were included in the laparoscopic group, and 53 in the traditional open operation group. Results Compared with the open surgery group, the incision length [(5.77±0.74) cm vs. (12.05±1.30) cm; t=-30.921, P=0.000], intraoperational blood loss [(107.20±27.23) mL vs. (168.87±96.76) mL; t=-4.483, P=0.000] and hospital stay time [(7.19±0.97) days vs. (8.32±1.16) days; t=-5.634, P=0.000] were significantly shorter or lower in the laparoscopic group. However, the operation time [(202.12±15.71) minutes vs. (196.32±16.73) minutes; t=1.891, P=0.061], number of lymph nodes removed (14.15±4.51 vs. 15.25±5.17; t=0.736, P=0.471), and intestinal functioning time [(57.88±9.70) hours vs. (59.16±10.82) hours; t=-0.655, P=0.514] were not significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the level of prealbumin and hemoglobin. Conclusion Compared with the traditional open operation, laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer has obvious advantages including smaller incision, lower blood loss during the operation, and fast recovery, without aggravating patients′ traumatic response or increasing the incidence of operational complications.
ObjectiveTo systemically evaluate safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and conventional open distal gastrostomy(CODG) with D2 lymph node dissection for Chinese patients with distal gastric cancer. MethodsLiterature were searched in PubMed database, the Cochrane Library, China science citation database (CSCD), Wanfang database, China science and technology journal database (CSTJ), China biomedical literature database (CBM), and China academic journal network publishing database (CAJD) to identify clinical random controlled trials, comparing safety and effectiveness of LADG and CODG with D2 lymph node dissection for Chinese patients with distal gastric cancer. The retrieval time was from the inception to Jun. 2013. Meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 7 clinical random controlled trials including 548 patients were analyzed. Compared with CODG group, LADG group had less blood loss (MD=-94.02, 95% CI:-140.96--47.07), shorter postoperative hospital stay(MD=-3.66, 95% CI:-5.76--1.57), earlier postoperative ambulation time(MD=-1.95, 95% CI:-2.74--1.17), earlier postoperative exhaust time (MD=-1.67, 95% CI:-2.05--1.30), lower incidence of complications(OR=0.26, 95% CI:0.14-0.51), P<0.050. But the operation time was longer in LADG group (MD=35.01, 95% CI:10.41-59.61, P=0.005). There was no significant difference between LADG group and CODG group on number of lymph node which were dissected during the operation (MD=-0.24, 95% CI:-0.99-0.51, P=0.530). ConclusionThe short-term outcome and safety of LADG for Chinese patients with distal gastric cancer is superior to CODG, but LADG prolongs the operation time and its long-term outcome should be proved by further outcomes of clinical controlled trials.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic operation versus laparotomy for stage I-IIa cervical cancer. MethodDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Knowledge, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were searched to collect controlled trials and cohort studies about laparoscopic operation versus laparotomy for stage I-IIa cervical cancer from inception to July 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 3 RCTs, 4 non-randomized controlled trials and 11 cohort studies involving 2 020 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with laparotomy, laparoscopy operation could reduce intraoperative blood loss (MD=-247.99, 95%CI -408.90 to -87.07, P=0.003) , the incidence of perioperative blood transfusion (OR=0.33, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.52, P<0.000 01) , haemoglobin level before and after surgery (MD=-0.98, 95%CI -0.13 to -0.93, P<0.000 01) , postoperative complication (OR=0.61, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.93, P=0.02) , and shorten postoperative exhaust time (MD=-17.41, 95%CI -32.79 to -2.03, P=0.03) and postoperative hospitalization days (MD=-2.51, 95%CI -3.25 to -1.78, P<0.000 01) . There were no significant differences between two groups in the number of pelvic lymph nodes removed, operative complications, as well as the recurrence rate, mortality and non-recurrence survivals after 2 to 5 years of follow-up. But the operation time of the laparoscopy operation group was longer than that of the laparotomy group. ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that compared with laparotomy, laparoscopic operation for early stage cervical cancer has less trauma, less blood loss, shorter hospitalization days and less postoperative complications. Due to the limited quantity of the included studies, more studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
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.
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 the therapeutic effects of open surgery and endovascular treatment for mesenteric venous thrombosis.MethodsThe clinical data of 22 patients with mesenteric venous thrombosis from March 2005 to January 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. One patient underwent open surgery including removal of necrotic small intestine and thrombectomy of superior mesenteric vein immediately admission to the hospital. Five cases were treated with simple anticoagulation and cured. Sixteen cases received thrombolytic therapy after primary anticoagulant therapy.ResultsOne case who underwent open surgery died of multiple organ failure at 72 h after the surgery. Five cases who received simple anticoagulant reached clinical relief finally. Sixteen patients who received thrombolytic therapy achieved recanalization totally or partially. Three cases died during follow-up (3 months to 7 years, average) of which 1 died of recurrence of acute superior mesenteric venous thrombosis, 1 died of myocardial infarction, and 1 died of stroke.ConclusionsFor patients with symptomatic mesenteric venous thrombosis, if there is no intestinal necrosis, there will be encouraging results by interventional thrombolytic therapy. And the treatment effect needs further experience accumulation in more cases.
Objective To explore the incidence of postoperative recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia and its related risk factors. Methods The clinical data of 213 patients with abdominal incisional hernia treated in the General Surgery of Shaanxi Provincial People’s Hospital from January 2015 to December 2019 were collected retrospectively, and the incidence of postoperative recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia and its related influencing factors were analyzed. Results A total of 213 patients underwent a complete follow-up. The follow-up time was 3 to 60 months, and the median follow-up time was 46 months. A total of 24 cases (11.27%) of hernia recurred after surgery. The univariate analysis results showed that body mass index (BMI), hernia ring size, incarceration, recurrent hernia, history of multiple abdominal operations, postoperative incision complications, factors such as increased abdominal pressure, and whether the patch were used for postoperative recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia influences (P<0.05). Further logistic multi-factor analysis results showed that BMI [OR=1.14, 95%CI (1.01, 1.29), P=0.040], incarcerated hernia [OR=8.94, 95%CI (1.94, 40.98), P=0.005], recurrent hernia [OR=10.91, 95%CI (2.09, 56.84), P=0.005], and hernia ring size [OR=1.15, 95%CI (1.03, 1.28), P=0.010] were related to the recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia after surgery (P<0.05). Conclusions The risk factors for hernia recurrence after abdominal incisional hernia repair include recurrent hernia, incarcerated hernia, hernia ring size, and BMI. For patients with high-risk factors, corresponding measures should be taken to prevent hernia recurrence.
ObjectiveTo summarized the clinical experience on laparoscopic radical surgery in patients with advanced distal gastric cancer. MethodsThe clinical data of 26 patients with advanced distant gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy were retrospectively analyzed. ResultsLaparoscopic distal gastrectomy was performed successfully in all patients. The operation time was (283.2±27.6) min (270-450 min) and the blood loss was (178.4±67.4) ml (80-350 ml). The time of gastrointestinal function recovery was (2.8±1.2) d (2-4 d), out of bed activity time was (1.5±0.4) d (1-3 d) and liquid diet feeding was (3.5±1.4) d (3-4 d). The hospital stay was (10.0±2.6) d (7-13 d). The number of harvested lymph nodes was 11 to 34 (17.8±7.3). The distance from proximal surgical margin to tumor was (7.0±2.1) cm (5-12 cm) and the distance from distal surgical margin to tumor was (5.5±1.8) cm (4-8 cm), thus surgical margins were negative in all samples. All patients were followed up for 3-48 months (mean 18.5 months), two patients with poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma died of extensive metastasis in 13 and 18 months, respectively, and other patients survived well. ConclusionsLaparoscopic radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer is safe and feasible. However, the advantage of laparoscopic technique over the conventional open surgery requires further study.
Objective To evaluate safety, efficacy, and indications of laparoscopic bile duct reexploration in treatment of bile duct stones. Methods Fifty-seven patients with bile duct stones who underwent laparoscopic common bile duct reexploration (laparoscope group) and 62 patients with bile duct stones who underwent open common bile duct reexploration (laparotomy group) were included into this study from February 2013 to February 2017 in the Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. The intraoperative and postoperative data of the patients were documented and analyzed. Results All the operations were performed successfully and all the patients had no extra-damage during the operation. One case was converted to the laparotomy due to the intraabdominal serious adhesion in the laparoscope group. Compared with the laparotomy group, the amount of intraoperative blood loss was less, the first time of anal exhaust was earlier, the rates of postoperative analgesia and incision infection were lower, and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscope group, there were significant differences (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the operative time, the hospitalization expense, primary suture rate of common bile duct, and the rates of postoperative complications such as the bile leakage, bile duct stricture, and residual stone between the laparoscope group and the laparotomy group (P>0.05). Conclusion With experienced skills and strict surgical indications, laparoscopic common bile duct reexploration is safe and effective in treatment of bile duct stones, and it has some advantages including less bleeding, rapid recovery, and shorter hospitalization time.