• 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

与传统腹腔镜手术相比,单切口腹腔镜右半结肠切除术并未带来炎症获益。

No inflammatory benefit obtained by single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right hemicolectomy compared with conventional laparoscopy.

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Nagoya City University, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, 467-8601, Japan.

出版信息

Surg Today. 2019 Jul;49(7):621-628. doi: 10.1007/s00595-019-01777-x. Epub 2019 Feb 9.

DOI:10.1007/s00595-019-01777-x
PMID:30739170
Abstract

PURPOSE

We evaluated the perioperative inflammatory mediators in a right hemicolectomy performed with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and traditional multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MLS) to compare the postoperative inflammatory response and feasibility of SILS with that of MLS.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we enrolled 56 consecutive colorectal cancer patients who underwent right hemicolectomy prospectively. Twenty patients underwent SILS, and 36 underwent MLS. The preoperative and postoperative levels of plasma vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), serum interleukin-6 (IL-6), and C-reactive protein (CRP) as well as the number of platelet cells were measured in all patients. The operation duration, number of harvested lymph nodes, length of the resected bowel, blood loss, and duration of hospital stay were also compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Neither SILS nor MLS had any conversion cases. The operation duration was longer for MLS than for SILS. Blood loss tended to be lower among patients who underwent SILS than among those who underwent MLS. However, the number of harvested LNs was significantly lower with SILS than with MLS. In both pre- and postoperative blood examinations, there was no marked difference in inflammatory mediators between MLS and SILS.

CONCLUSION

There was no systemic inflammatory advantage associated with SILS compared with MLS.

摘要

目的

我们评估了在单切口腹腔镜手术(SILS)和传统多孔腹腔镜手术(MLS)下进行右半结肠切除术时的围手术期炎症介质,以比较 SILS 与 MLS 的术后炎症反应和可行性。

方法

在这项回顾性研究中,我们前瞻性地纳入了 56 例接受右半结肠切除术的结直肠癌患者。20 例患者接受 SILS,36 例患者接受 MLS。所有患者均测量了术前和术后血浆血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)、血清白细胞介素-6(IL-6)和 C 反应蛋白(CRP)水平以及血小板细胞数。还比较了两组之间的手术时间、采集的淋巴结数量、切除肠段的长度、出血量和住院时间。

结果

SILS 和 MLS 均无转换病例。与 SILS 相比,MLS 的手术时间更长。SILS 组的出血量倾向于低于 MLS 组。然而,SILS 组采集的淋巴结数量明显少于 MLS 组。在术前和术后的血液检查中,MLS 和 SILS 之间的炎症介质没有明显差异。

结论

与 MLS 相比,SILS 并没有全身性炎症优势。

相似文献

1
No inflammatory benefit obtained by single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right hemicolectomy compared with conventional laparoscopy.与传统腹腔镜手术相比,单切口腹腔镜右半结肠切除术并未带来炎症获益。
Surg Today. 2019 Jul;49(7):621-628. doi: 10.1007/s00595-019-01777-x. Epub 2019 Feb 9.
2
A historical comparison of single incision and conventional multiport laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.单切口与传统多端口腹腔镜右半结肠切除术的历史比较
Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(10):e618-22. doi: 10.1111/codi.12380.
3
[Application of single incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery in radical right hemicolon cancer surgery].单切口加单孔腹腔镜手术在右半结肠癌根治术中的应用
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2021 Jan 25;24(1):54-61. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.441530-20200605-00344.
4
Single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical results.单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜右半结肠切除术:短期手术结果比较。
Surg Endosc. 2011 Jun;25(6):1887-92. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1481-4. Epub 2011 Feb 27.
5
Single Port Laparoscopic Total and Subtotal Colectomies for Inflammatory Bowel Disease in a District General Hospital.地区综合医院单孔腹腔镜全结肠切除术和次全结肠切除术治疗炎症性肠病
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2019 Nov;29(11):1431-1435. doi: 10.1089/lap.2019.0259. Epub 2019 Sep 24.
6
Systematic review of comparing single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer.系统评价比较单切口与传统腹腔镜右半结肠切除术治疗右半结肠癌。
World J Surg Oncol. 2019 Nov 4;17(1):179. doi: 10.1186/s12957-019-1721-6.
7
A safety study of transumbilical single incision versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.经脐单切口与传统腹腔镜手术治疗结直肠癌的安全性研究:一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2015 Nov 30;16:539. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-1067-5.
8
Outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic colectomy surgery in obese patients: a case-matched study.肥胖患者单切口腹腔镜结肠切除术的手术结果:一项病例匹配研究。
Surg Endosc. 2016 Feb;30(2):739-744. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4268-9. Epub 2015 Jun 20.
9
Clinical and oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.单孔腹腔镜手术治疗右半结肠癌的临床及肿瘤学效果:倾向评分匹配分析。
Surg Endosc. 2019 Apr;33(4):1117-1123. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6370-2. Epub 2018 Jul 24.
10
Single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a report of 33 cases in Saudi Arabia.单切口腹腔镜结直肠手术:沙特阿拉伯33例报告
Ann Saudi Med. 2016 Jul-Aug;36(4):282-7. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2016.282.

引用本文的文献

1
A propensity score matching investigation of short-term results of single-incision laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection via ileostomy site.经回肠造口部位单切口腹腔镜低位前直肠切除术短期结果的倾向评分匹配研究
J Minim Access Surg. 2023 Jul-Sep;19(3):371-377. doi: 10.4103/jmas.jmas_163_22.
2
Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of clinical and pathological outcomes.单切口与传统腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌:临床和病理结果的荟萃分析
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2022 Sep;17(3):387-405. doi: 10.5114/wiitm.2022.118158. Epub 2022 Jul 15.

本文引用的文献

1
Postoperative serum Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor is an independent prognostic factor of disease free survival and overall survival in patients with non metastatic colon cancer.术后血清血管内皮生长因子是无转移结直肠癌患者无病生存和总生存的独立预后因素。
Am J Surg. 2018 Aug;216(2):255-259. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.06.037. Epub 2017 Jul 1.
2
Single Incision Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Using Conventional Laparoscopic Instruments: Initial Experience with 44 Cases.使用传统腹腔镜器械的单切口腹腔镜结直肠手术:44例初步经验
J Invest Surg. 2015;28(6):341-5. doi: 10.3109/08941939.2015.1010025. Epub 2015 Jul 23.
3
Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic colectomy with or without natural-orifice specimen extraction.
腹腔镜结肠切除术联合与不联合自然腔道取标本的随机临床试验。
Br J Surg. 2015 May;102(6):630-7. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9757. Epub 2015 Mar 12.
4
Single incision laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopic colectomy.单切口腹腔镜结直肠癌切除术:与传统腹腔镜结直肠癌切除术的比较
Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014 Sep;87(3):131-8. doi: 10.4174/astr.2014.87.3.131. Epub 2014 Aug 26.
5
Evaluation of invasiveness in single-site laparoscopic colectomy, using "the PainVision™ system" for quantitative analysis of pain sensation.使用“PainVision™系统”对单部位腹腔镜结肠切除术的侵袭性进行评估,以对疼痛感觉进行定量分析。
Surg Endosc. 2014 Nov;28(11):3216-23. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3594-7. Epub 2014 Jul 16.
6
A historical comparison of single incision and conventional multiport laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.单切口与传统多端口腹腔镜右半结肠切除术的历史比较
Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(10):e618-22. doi: 10.1111/codi.12380.
7
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery using a homemade transumbilical port for synchronous colon and hepatic lesions: a case report.使用自制经脐端口的单切口腹腔镜手术治疗同步性结肠和肝脏病变:一例报告
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013 Aug;23(4):e164-7. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31828b8177.
8
A prospective, randomized comparison of pain, inflammatory response, and short-term outcomes between single port and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.一项单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术的前瞻性随机对照研究:疼痛、炎症反应和短期结局比较。
Surg Endosc. 2013 Apr;27(4):1254-9. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2589-5. Epub 2012 Dec 12.
9
Conventional laparoscopic versus single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a case cohort comparison of short-term outcomes in 144 consecutive cases.传统腹腔镜与单孔腹腔镜右半结肠切除术:144 例连续病例短期结局的病例对照比较。
Surg Endosc. 2013 Feb;27(2):471-7. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2460-8. Epub 2012 Jul 18.
10
Single-incision right hemicolectomy for malignancy: a feasible technique with standard laparoscopic instrumentation.单孔右半结肠切除术治疗恶性肿瘤:一种使用标准腹腔镜器械可行的技术。
Colorectal Dis. 2012 Nov;14(11):e764-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03175.x.