Komiyama Shinichi, Takeya Chiaki, Takahashi Rena, Nagasaki Sumito, Kubushiro Kaneyuki
Department of Gynecology, Toho University Ohashi Medical Center.
J Cancer. 2016 Apr 29;7(8):890-9. doi: 10.7150/jca.14987. eCollection 2016.
[Objective] To achieve less invasive lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer patients, we performed extraperitoneal pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy via a small midline abdominal incision with retroperitoneal approach. The feasibility and safety of this method were investigated. [Methods] Inclusion criteria were 1) endometrioid adenocarcinoma diagnosed by preoperative biopsy, 2) myometrial invasion by magnetic resonance imaging, and 3) no peritoneal dissemination or distant metastasis by computed tomography. Systematic extraperitoneal dissection of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes was performed via an approximately 12-cm midline lower abdominal incision, after which hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were done (extraperitoneal group). The historical control group was patients who underwent standard transperitoneal lymphadenectomy followed by hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The two groups were compared for demographic characteristics, perioperative factors, and complications. [Results] A total of 62 patients were enrolled. Demographic and clinicopathological factors showed no differences between the extraperitoneal group (n = 34) and the historical control group (n = 28). The median number of pelvic (30 vs. 28) and para-aortic (14 vs. 17) nodes dissected was also similar. However, median intraoperative blood loss was significantly smaller in the extraperitoneal group than the control group (220 vs. 573 g). Median operating time (265 vs. 323.5 min), median laparotomy time (60 vs. 295 min), and median initial flatus time (8 vs. 32 hours) were all significantly shorter in the extraperitoneal group, while complications and severe postoperative pain were significantly less frequent. [Conclusions] Our new technique was feasible, safe, and less invasive than standard laparotomy. It is an alternative to laparoscope-assisted or robotic procedures.
[目的] 为了在子宫内膜癌患者中实现微创淋巴结切除术,我们通过腹部中线小切口经腹膜后途径进行了腹膜外盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除术。研究了该方法的可行性和安全性。[方法] 纳入标准为:1)术前活检诊断为子宫内膜样腺癌;2)磁共振成像显示肌层浸润;3)计算机断层扫描未发现腹膜播散或远处转移。经下腹中线约12 cm切口进行盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结的系统性腹膜外清扫,之后行子宫切除术及双侧输卵管卵巢切除术(腹膜外组)。历史对照组为接受标准经腹淋巴结切除术,之后行子宫切除术及双侧输卵管卵巢切除术的患者。比较两组的人口统计学特征、围手术期因素及并发症。[结果] 共纳入62例患者。腹膜外组(n = 34)和历史对照组(n = 28)的人口统计学和临床病理因素无差异。盆腔(30枚对28枚)及腹主动脉旁(14枚对17枚)淋巴结清扫的中位数也相似。然而,腹膜外组术中失血量中位数明显少于对照组(220 g对573 g)。腹膜外组的中位手术时间(265分钟对323.5分钟)、中位开腹时间(60分钟对295分钟)及中位首次排气时间(8小时对32小时)均明显更短,而并发症及术后严重疼痛的发生率明显更低。[结论] 我们的新技术可行、安全,且比标准开腹手术创伤更小。它是腹腔镜辅助或机器人手术的替代方法。