Suppr超能文献

与传统腹会阴联合切除术相比,俯卧位下经提肌外腹会阴联合切除术治疗晚期低位直肠癌的短期疗效:单中心早期经验

Short-term Outcomes of an Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection in the Prone Position Compared With a Conventional Abdominoperineal Resection for Advanced Low Rectal Cancer: The Early Experience at a Single Institution.

作者信息

Park Seungwan, Hur Hyuk, Min Byung Soh, Kim Nam Kyu

机构信息

Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Ann Coloproctol. 2016 Feb;32(1):12-9. doi: 10.3393/ac.2016.32.1.12. Epub 2016 Feb 29.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study compared the perioperative and pathologic outcomes between an extralevator abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the prone position and a conventional APR.

METHODS

Between September 2011 and March 2014, an extralevator APR in the prone position was performed on 13 patients with rectal cancer and a conventional APR on 26 such patients. Patients' demographics and perioperative and pathologic outcomes were obtained from the colorectal cancer database and electronic medical charts.

RESULTS

Age and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level were significantly different between the conventional and the extralevator APR in the prone position (median age, 65 years vs. 55 years [P = 0.001]; median preoperative CEA level, 4.94 ng/mL vs. 1.81 ng/mL [P = 0.011]). For perioperative outcomes, 1 (3.8%) intraoperative bowel perforation occurred in the conventional APR group and 2 (15.3%) in the extralevator APR group. In the conventional and extralevator APR groups, 12 (46.2%) and 6 patients (46.2%) had postoperative complications, and 8 (66.7%) and 2 patients (33.4%) had major complications (Clavien-Dindo III/IV), respectively. The circumferential resection margin involvement rate was higher in the extralevator APR group compared with the conventional APR group (3 of 13 [23.1%] vs. 3 of 26 [11.5%]).

CONCLUSION

The extralevator APR in the prone position for patients with advanced low rectal cancer has no advantages in perioperative and pathologic outcomes over a conventional APR for such patients. However, through early experience with a new surgical technique, we identified various reasons for the lack of favorable outcomes and expect sufficient experience to produce better peri- or postoperative outcomes.

摘要

目的

本研究比较了俯卧位经肛提肌腹会阴联合切除术(APR)与传统APR的围手术期及病理结果。

方法

2011年9月至2014年3月期间,对13例直肠癌患者实施了俯卧位经肛提肌APR,对26例直肠癌患者实施了传统APR。患者的人口统计学资料以及围手术期和病理结果均来自结直肠癌数据库和电子病历。

结果

传统APR组与俯卧位经肛提肌APR组在年龄和术前癌胚抗原(CEA)水平上存在显著差异(中位年龄,65岁对55岁[P = 0.001];术前CEA水平中位数,4.94 ng/mL对1.81 ng/mL[P = 0.011])。围手术期结果方面,传统APR组发生1例(3.8%)术中肠穿孔,经肛提肌APR组发生2例(15.3%)。在传统APR组和经肛提肌APR组中,分别有12例(46.2%)和6例(46.2%)患者出现术后并发症,分别有8例(66.7%)和2例(33.4%)患者出现严重并发症(Clavien-DindoⅢ/Ⅳ级)。与传统APR组相比,经肛提肌APR组的环周切缘受累率更高(13例中有3例[23.1%]对26例中有3例[11.5%])。

结论

对于晚期低位直肠癌患者,俯卧位经肛提肌APR在围手术期及病理结果方面并不优于传统APR。然而,通过对一种新手术技术的早期经验,我们确定了缺乏良好结果的各种原因,并期望有足够的经验能产生更好的围手术期或术后结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/43a2/4783506/771a45eef00d/ac-32-12-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验