Fleshman J W, Wexner S D, Anvari M, LaTulippe J F, Birnbaum E H, Kodner I J, Read T E, Nogueras J J, Weiss E G
Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Dis Colon Rectum. 1999 Jul;42(7):930-9. doi: 10.1007/BF02237105.
The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and open abdominoperineal resection for cancer.
Records of 194 patients who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (42 patients) or open abdominoperineal resection (152 patients) at three institutions between 1991 and 1997 were reviewed. Follow-up was through office charts, American College of Surgeons cancer registry, or telephone contact. Tumors included (laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and open abdominoperineal resection, respectively) adenocarcinoma (86 and 92 percent), squamous (12 and 7 percent), and gastrointestinal stromal (2 and 1.4 percent) types; Stages I (17 and 26 percent), II (24 and 33 percent), III (43 and 32 percent), and IV (14 and 9 percent); and those with invasion of pelvic structures (14 and 16 percent).
Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection was converted to open abdominoperineal resection in 21 percent because of vessel injury (33 percent), poor exposure (22 percent), adhesions (22 percent), inguinal hernia (11 percent), or radiation fibrosis (11 percent). Perineal infections occurred more often in the laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection group (24 vs. 8 percent; P=0.02). Late stoma complications were similar. Mean hospital stay was shorter after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (7 vs. 12 days). Radial margins were positive in 12 percent of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and 12.5 percent of open abdominoperineal resection specimens. Tumor recurrence was similar for both local (19 and 14 percent) and distant (38 and 26 percent) recurrence. Survival rates were similar by Kaplan-Meier curves, with median follow-up of 19 and 24 months, respectively (P=0.22; log rank).
Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection can be performed safely and results in a shorter hospital stay. A randomized, prospective trial is needed to determine the long-term outcome of cancer treatment.
本研究旨在比较腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术与开放性腹会阴联合切除术治疗癌症的安全性和疗效。
回顾了1991年至1997年间在三个机构接受腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术(42例患者)或开放性腹会阴联合切除术(152例患者)的194例患者的记录。通过门诊病历、美国外科医师学会癌症登记处或电话联系进行随访。肿瘤类型(分别为腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术和开放性腹会阴联合切除术)包括腺癌(86%和92%)、鳞癌(12%和7%)以及胃肠道间质瘤(2%和1.4%);分期为I期(17%和26%)、II期(24%和33%)、III期(43%和32%)以及IV期(14%和9%);侵犯盆腔结构的患者比例为(14%和16%)。
21%的腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术因血管损伤(33%)、暴露不佳(22%)、粘连(22%)、腹股沟疝(11%)或放射性纤维化(11%)而转为开放性腹会阴联合切除术。腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除组会阴部感染更为常见(24%对8%;P=0.02)。晚期造口并发症相似。腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术后平均住院时间较短(7天对12天)。腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术标本的切缘阳性率为12%,开放性腹会阴联合切除术标本的切缘阳性率为12.5%。局部复发(19%和14%)和远处复发(38%和26%)在两组中相似。根据Kaplan-Meier曲线,生存率相似,中位随访时间分别为19个月和24个月(P=0.22;对数秩检验)。
腹腔镜腹会阴联合切除术可安全实施,且住院时间较短。需要进行一项随机前瞻性试验来确定癌症治疗的长期结果。