Ng S S M, Li J C M, Lee J F Y, Yiu R Y C, Leung K L
Department of Surgery, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Surg Endosc. 2006 Aug;20(8):1193-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-005-0330-3. Epub 2006 Jul 24.
No previous report could be found in the literature comparing laparoscopic and open total colectomy for colorectal cancers, especially synchronous colorectal cancers. This study aimed to compare the short-term clinical outcomes and oncologic results of laparoscopic and open total colectomy or proctocolectomy for colorectal cancers.
Between July 1997 and January 2005, six patients with colorectal cancers underwent elective laparoscopic total colectomy or proctocolectomy at the authors' institution. Clinical data for 12 patients who underwent elective open total colectomy or proctocolectomy for colorectal cancers during the same period were prospectively collected and compared.
The median follow-up periods were 43.9 months for the laparoscopic group and 48.2 months for the open group. Conversion to open procedure was required for one patient (16.7%) in the laparoscopic group because of bleeding. The median operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (427.5 min; range, 280-480 min vs 172.5 min; range, 90-260 min; p = 0.001). The patients in the laparoscopic group required a significantly shorter duration of parenteral analgesia (3 vs 5 days; p = 0.01), but there were no differences in time to first bowel motion, time to resumption of diet, time to full ambulation, and duration of hospital stay between the two groups. Perioperative morbidity rates were comparable between the two groups, and there was no operative mortality. The oncologic results, including number of lymph nodes removed, recurrence rates, and survival rates, were similar in the two groups.
Laparoscopic total colectomy has short-term clinical outcomes (postoperative recovery and perioperative morbidity and mortality rates) and oncologic results similar to those of open surgery for treating patients with colorectal cancers. Our study has shown that the only advantage of laparoscopic over open surgery is a shorter duration of analgesic requirement, but at the expense of a longer operative time.
在文献中未发现之前有关于比较腹腔镜和开放全结肠切除术治疗结直肠癌,尤其是同时性结直肠癌的报道。本研究旨在比较腹腔镜和开放全结肠切除术或直肠结肠切除术治疗结直肠癌的短期临床结局和肿瘤学结果。
1997年7月至2005年1月期间,6例结直肠癌患者在作者所在机构接受了择期腹腔镜全结肠切除术或直肠结肠切除术。前瞻性收集并比较了同期12例因结直肠癌接受择期开放全结肠切除术或直肠结肠切除术患者的临床数据。
腹腔镜组的中位随访时间为43.9个月,开放组为48.2个月。腹腔镜组有1例患者(16.7%)因出血需要转为开放手术。腹腔镜组的中位手术时间明显更长(427.5分钟;范围280 - 480分钟,而开放组为172.5分钟;范围90 - 260分钟;p = 0.001)。腹腔镜组患者的肠外镇痛时间明显更短(3天对5天;p = 0.01),但两组在首次排便时间、恢复饮食时间、完全下床活动时间和住院时间方面没有差异。两组围手术期发病率相当,无手术死亡。两组的肿瘤学结果,包括切除的淋巴结数量、复发率和生存率相似。
腹腔镜全结肠切除术治疗结直肠癌患者的短期临床结局(术后恢复以及围手术期发病率和死亡率)和肿瘤学结果与开放手术相似。我们的研究表明,腹腔镜手术相对于开放手术的唯一优势是镇痛需求时间较短,但代价是手术时间更长。