• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

胸腔镜食管癌切除术:机器人辅助俯卧位的可行性和安全性。

Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: feasibility and safety of robotic assistance in the prone position.

机构信息

Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 250 Seongsan-no, Seodaemun-gu, 120-752 Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010 Jan;139(1):53-59.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.05.030. Epub 2009 Jul 29.

DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.05.030
PMID:19660280
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the prone position.

METHODS

Twenty-one patients underwent robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position by a surgical oncologist who had no prior experience with thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were serially recorded to monitor changes in prone positioning.

RESULTS

All thoracoscopic procedures were completed with a robot-assisted technique followed by cervical esophagogastrostomy. R0 resection was achieved in 20 patients (95.2%), and the number of dissected nodes was 38.0 + or - 14.2. Robot console time was significantly reduced from 176.3 + or - 12.3 minutes in the initial 6 patients (group 1) to 81.7 + or - 16.5 minutes in the latter 15 patients (group 2) (P = .000). In group 2, there was less blood loss (P = .018), more patients could be extubated in the operating room (P = .004), and the number of dissected mediastinal nodes tended to be increased (P = .093). There was no incidence of pneumonia or 90-day mortality. Major complications included anastomotic leakage in 4 patients, vocal cord palsy in 6 patients, and intra-abdominal bleeding in 1 patient. The prone position led to an elevation of central venous pressure and mean pulmonary arterial pressure and a decrease in static lung compliance. However, cardiac index and mean arterial pressure were well maintained with the acceptable range of partial pressure of arterial oxygen and carbon dioxide.

CONCLUSION

Robotic assistance in the prone position is technically feasible and safe. Prone positioning was well tolerated, but preoperative risk assessment and meticulous anesthetic manipulation should be carried out.

摘要

目的

评估机器人辅助胸腔镜下食管癌俯卧位手术的可行性和安全性。

方法

由一位没有胸腔镜食管切除术经验的外科肿瘤学家对 21 名患者进行了机器人辅助胸腔镜下食管癌俯卧位手术。连续记录血流动力学和呼吸参数,以监测俯卧位的变化。

结果

所有胸腔镜手术均采用机器人辅助技术完成,随后行颈段食管胃吻合术。20 例(95.2%)患者达到 R0 切除,淋巴结清扫数为 38.0 ± 14.2 个。在最初的 6 例患者(第 1 组)中,机器人控制台时间为 176.3 ± 12.3 分钟,而在随后的 15 例患者(第 2 组)中为 81.7 ± 16.5 分钟,明显减少(P =.000)。在第 2 组中,出血量较少(P =.018),更多患者可在手术室拔管(P =.004),且纵隔淋巴结清扫数有增加的趋势(P =.093)。无肺炎或 90 天死亡率。主要并发症包括 4 例吻合口漏,6 例声带麻痹和 1 例腹腔内出血。俯卧位导致中心静脉压和平均肺动脉压升高,静态肺顺应性降低。然而,心指数和平均动脉压保持在可接受的动脉血氧分压和二氧化碳分压范围内。

结论

机器人辅助在俯卧位是可行且安全的。俯卧位耐受性良好,但应进行术前风险评估和精细的麻醉操作。

相似文献

1
Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: feasibility and safety of robotic assistance in the prone position.胸腔镜食管癌切除术:机器人辅助俯卧位的可行性和安全性。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010 Jan;139(1):53-59.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.05.030. Epub 2009 Jul 29.
2
Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal lymphadenectomy in prone position--experience of 130 patients.微创食管切除术:俯卧位胸腔镜下食管游离及纵隔淋巴结清扫——130例患者的经验
J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Jul;203(1):7-16. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.03.016.
3
Robot-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy for cancer.机器人辅助胸腔镜食管癌切除术治疗癌症
Br J Surg. 2009 Aug;96(8):878-86. doi: 10.1002/bjs.6647.
4
Robot-assisted thoracoscopic hybrid esophagectomy in the semi-prone position under pneumothorax.机器人辅助半俯卧位气胸下胸腔镜杂交食管切除术。
Artif Organs. 2013 Jun;37(6):576-80. doi: 10.1111/aor.12018. Epub 2013 Feb 18.
5
[Hand-assisted video-thoracoscopy for resection of esophageal cancer].[手辅助电视胸腔镜用于食管癌切除术]
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2005 Mar 15;43(6):351-3.
6
Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for benign and malignant disease: lessons learned from 46 consecutive procedures.胸腔镜和腹腔镜食管切除术治疗良性和恶性疾病:从连续46例手术中吸取的经验教训。
J Am Coll Surg. 2003 Dec;197(6):902-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.07.005.
7
Robot-assisted thoracoscopic lymphadenectomy along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the prone position: technical report and short-term outcomes.俯卧位机器人辅助胸腔镜下沿左喉返神经行食管癌淋巴结清扫术:技术报告及短期疗效
World J Surg. 2012 Jul;36(7):1608-16. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1538-8.
8
[Comparison of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in decubitus position with prone position].[侧卧位与俯卧位胸腔镜食管切除术的比较]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2011 Sep;14(9):686-8.
9
Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is associated with less-restrictive ventilatory impairment and less risk for pulmonary complication than open laparotomy in thoracoscopic esophagectomy.在胸腔镜食管切除术中,与开腹手术相比,手辅助腹腔镜手术(HALS)导致的通气障碍限制较少,肺部并发症风险较低。
Surgery. 2016 Feb;159(2):459-66. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.07.026. Epub 2015 Sep 9.
10
A comparison between the prone and lateral position for performing a thoracoscopic anterior release and fusion for pediatric spinal deformity.小儿脊柱畸形胸腔镜前路松解融合术中俯卧位与侧卧位的比较。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Sep 15;28(18):2176-80. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000084641.96288.8D.

引用本文的文献

1
A Comparison of Arterial Blood Gas Data Between Open Esophagectomy and Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy.开放食管切除术与胸腔镜食管切除术动脉血气数据的比较
Juntendo Med J. 2025 Jun 4;71(3):180-186. doi: 10.14789/ejmj.JMJ24-0038-OA. eCollection 2025.
2
Initial experience of complete portal robotic esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma in semi-prone position under single-lumen insertion for anaesthesia.单腔插管麻醉下半俯卧位完全腹腔镜机器人食管癌切除术的初步经验
J Thorac Dis. 2025 Apr 30;17(4):2693-2704. doi: 10.21037/jtd-24-1410. Epub 2025 Apr 27.
3
Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study.
机器人辅助与微创食管切除术治疗胸段食管癌患者的长期疗效:倾向评分匹配研究。
World J Surg Oncol. 2024 Mar 20;22(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12957-024-03358-w.
4
Is Robotic Surgery the Future for Resectable Esophageal Cancer?: A Systematic Literature Review of Oncological and Clinical Outcomes.机器人手术会是可切除食管癌的未来治疗方式吗?:肿瘤学及临床结局的系统文献综述
Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Jul;31(7):4281-4297. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-15148-5. Epub 2024 Mar 13.
5
Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy.机器人辅助微创食管切除术与微创食管切除术的比较
Front Oncol. 2024 Jan 15;13:1293645. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1293645. eCollection 2023.
6
Surgical outcomes of 500 robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomies for esophageal carcinoma.500例机器人辅助微创食管癌切除术的手术结果
J Thorac Dis. 2023 Sep 28;15(9):4745-4756. doi: 10.21037/jtd-23-637. Epub 2023 Aug 30.
7
Adverse outcomes of artificial pneumothorax under right bronchial occlusion for patients with thoracoscopic-assisted oesophagectomy in the prone position versus the semiprone position.胸腔镜辅助食管癌切除术患者在俯卧位与半俯卧位下右支气管阻塞时人工气胸的不良结局
Front Oncol. 2022 Aug 9;12:919910. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.919910. eCollection 2022.
8
Anesthesia for robotic thoracic surgery.机器人辅助胸外科手术的麻醉
Saudi J Anaesth. 2021 Jul-Sep;15(3):356-361. doi: 10.4103/sja.sja_54_21. Epub 2021 Jun 19.
9
Lower local recurrence rate after robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy than conventional thoracoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer.机器人辅助胸腔镜与传统胸腔镜手术治疗食管癌的局部复发率比较。
Sci Rep. 2021 Mar 24;11(1):6774. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-86420-x.
10
Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: Meticulous surgery minimizing postoperative complications.机器人辅助微创食管癌切除术:精细手术可减少术后并发症。
Ann Gastroenterol Surg. 2020 Aug 16;4(6):608-617. doi: 10.1002/ags3.12390. eCollection 2020 Nov.