• 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

[经手套端口结肠镜辅助经肛门微创手术与内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗早期直肠肿瘤的比较]

[A comparison of colonoscopy - assisted transanal minimally invasive surgery via glove port and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of early rectal tumors].

作者信息

Yao J, Liao X J, Mao W M, Wu W J, Yu Y Y, Yang G G

机构信息

Department of Anal-Colorectal Surgery, Hangzhou Third People's Hospital Clinical College of Anhui Medical University, Hangzhou 310009, China.

出版信息

Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Jul 25;22(7):656-661. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.07.010.

DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.07.010
PMID:31302964
Abstract

To explore the safety and feasibility of colonoscopy - assisted transanal minimally invasive surgery via glove port (CA-TAMIS-GP) in the treatment of early rectal tumors. A total of 67 patients evaluated as early rectal tumors (adenoma limited within mucosal layer) with diameter ≤4.0 cm at Department of Anal-Colorectal Surgery, Hangzhou Third People's Hospital from July 2013 to March 2017 were prospectively enrolled in the study. Benign tumors were diagnosed by preoperative imaging in all the patients with the distance to anal edge of 4 to 20 cm. Patients were randomly divided into treatment group and the control group according to the random number table. The treatment group (=32) underwent CA-TAMIS-GP, including 19 males and 13 females with mean age of (55.6±11.2) years and mean tumor size of (3.3±0.4) cm, while the control group (=35) underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD, control group), including 20 males and 15 females with mean age of (52.9±12.3) years and mean tumor size of (3.4±0.5) cm. Differences of baseline data between two groups were not significant (all >0.05). The specific method of CA-TAMIS-GP was as follows: a surgical rubber glove sleeve (No.6) was passed through the anal device; the glove was fixed at the anvil device; after fully expanding the anus, the anal sac was placed into the anus with the fingers outside; then, the cuff and the anal sac were sutured and fixed to the perianal; a well-tight glove path was established; the ultrasonic scalpel, grasper and the colonoscopy lens connected to the host platform and the electric negative pressure suction were inserted into the three finger sleeves respectively and fixed by rubber band or silk thread; the laparoscopic instruments such as the grasper and the ultrasonic scalpel were used for pulling, grasping, cutting, electrocoagulation, suturing and other operations to complete the resection of rectal lesions. Efficacy, postoperative complication and operative cost, etc. between two groups were compared using the student's test, chi-square tests, and Fisher's exact test. Operations of two groups were completed successfully without conversion to laparotomy. Histopathologic examination showed all specimens had negative margins with the surgical resection of the layer to the submucosa, and showed no significant differences between two groups (>0.05). Compared to the control group, the operation time was shorter [(49.5±14.6) minutes vs.(66.1±17.6) minutes, =-4.235, <0.001], and the intraoperative hemorrhage was less [(4.2±1.6) ml vs. (6.2±2.1) ml, =-4.349, <0.001] in the treatment group with significant differences. In the treatment group, 6 patients had mild anal pain or discomfort after operation, and 1 patient in the control group showed anal foreign body sensation. The difference was statistically significant [18.8% (6/32) vs. 2.9% (1/35), =0.048]. The incidence of postoperative hematochezia in the treatment group was lower than that in the control group [9.4% (3/32) vs. 20.0% (7/35), =0.310] without significant difference. The cost of consumables in the treatment group was (1586.9±204.4) yuan, which was lower than (7694.4±1123.2) yuan in control group, and the difference was statistically significant (=-30.880, <0.001). All the patients were followed up for 6 to 36 months after operation, and no recurrence or long-term complication occurred in the treatment group, while 1 case developed local recurrence in the control group. CA-TAMIS-GP is a safe and effective method for early rectal tumors with simple and economical characteristics, which broadens the application of colonoscopy.

摘要

探讨经手套端口结肠镜辅助经肛门微创手术(CA-TAMIS-GP)治疗早期直肠肿瘤的安全性和可行性。2013年7月至2017年3月,前瞻性纳入杭州市第三人民医院肛肠外科67例经评估为早期直肠肿瘤(腺瘤局限于黏膜层)、直径≤4.0 cm的患者。所有患者均通过术前影像学诊断为良性肿瘤,距肛缘4至20 cm。根据随机数字表将患者随机分为治疗组和对照组。治疗组(n = 32)接受CA-TAMIS-GP,其中男性19例,女性13例,平均年龄(55.6±11.2)岁,平均肿瘤大小(3.3±0.4)cm;对照组(n = 35)接受内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD,对照组),其中男性20例,女性15例,平均年龄(52.9±12.3)岁,平均肿瘤大小(3.4±0.5)cm。两组基线数据差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。CA-TAMIS-GP的具体方法如下:将一个手术橡胶手套袖套(6号)穿过肛门装置;将手套固定在吻合器装置上;充分扩肛后,将肛门囊经手指放入肛门外;然后,将袖带和肛门囊缝合固定于肛周;建立一个密闭的手套通道;将超声刀、抓钳和连接主机平台的结肠镜镜头以及电动负压吸引器分别插入三个手指套内,并用橡皮筋或丝线固定;使用抓钳和超声刀等腹腔镜器械进行牵拉、抓取、切割、电凝、缝合等操作,完成直肠病变切除。采用t检验、卡方检验和Fisher确切概率法比较两组的疗效、术后并发症及手术费用等。两组手术均顺利完成,未中转开腹。病理检查显示所有标本手术切除至黏膜下层切缘阴性,两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与对照组相比,治疗组手术时间更短[(49.5±14.6)分钟 vs.(66.1±17.6)分钟,t = -4.235,P<0.001],术中出血更少[(4.2±1.6)ml vs.(6.2±2.1)ml,t = -4.349,P<0.001],差异有统计学意义。治疗组6例患者术后有轻度肛门疼痛或不适,对照组1例患者有肛门异物感。差异有统计学意义[18.8%(6/32) vs. 2.9%(1/35),P = 0.048]。治疗组术后便血发生率低于对照组[9.4%(3/32) vs. 20.0%(7/35),P = 0.310],差异无统计学意义。治疗组耗材费用为(1586.9±204.4)元,低于对照组的(7694.4±1123.2)元,差异有统计学意义(t = -30.880,P<0.001)。所有患者术后随访6至36个月,治疗组无复发或远期并发症发生,对照组1例出现局部复发。CA-TAMIS-GP是一种治疗早期直肠肿瘤安全有效的方法,具有操作简单、经济的特点,拓宽了结肠镜的应用范围。

相似文献

1
[A comparison of colonoscopy - assisted transanal minimally invasive surgery via glove port and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of early rectal tumors].[经手套端口结肠镜辅助经肛门微创手术与内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗早期直肠肿瘤的比较]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Jul 25;22(7):656-661. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.07.010.
2
Comparative evaluation of colonoscopy-assisted transanal minimally invasive surgery via glove port and endoscopic submucosal dissection for early rectal tumor.经肛门内镜微创手术与结肠镜辅助经肛门入路微创手术治疗早期直肠肿瘤的对比评估。
Int J Surg. 2017 Jun;42:197-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.05.029. Epub 2017 May 11.
3
Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Rectal Lesions: A Community Hospital Experience.经肛门微创外科手术与内镜黏膜下剥离术治疗直肠病变:社区医院经验。
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2024 Oct;34(10):910-914. doi: 10.1089/lap.2024.0201. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
4
Transanal single-port microsurgery for rectal tumors: minimal invasive surgery under spinal anesthesia.经肛门单孔微创手术治疗直肠肿瘤:椎管内麻醉下的微创手术。
Surg Endosc. 2014 Jan;28(1):271-80. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3184-0. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
5
[Transanal endoscopic microsurgery by transanal glove port combined with colonoscopy for excision of rectal tumors].经肛门手套端口联合结肠镜检查行经肛门内镜显微手术切除直肠肿瘤
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2014 May;17(5):473-5.
6
Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Lesions.经肛门微创手术治疗直肠病变
JSLS. 2016 Jul-Sep;20(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2016.00032.
7
Combined endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal minimally invasive surgery for the management of lower rectal adenoma extending above the dentate line: A case report.联合内镜下黏膜剥离术和经肛门微创手术治疗齿状线以上低位直肠腺瘤:一例报告
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 May;98(19):e15289. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015289.
8
[Application of dental floss traction-assisted endoscopic submucosa dissection to rectal neuroendocrine neoplasm].牙线牵引辅助内镜黏膜下剥离术在直肠神经内分泌肿瘤中的应用
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Apr 25;22(4):377-382. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.04.011.
9
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for treatment of rectal tumors: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.内镜黏膜下剥离术(ESD)与经肛门内镜显微手术(TEM)治疗直肠肿瘤的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Surg Endosc. 2020 Apr;34(4):1688-1695. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06945-1. Epub 2019 Jul 10.
10
[Application of closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device in the treatment of high perianal abscess].封闭负压冲洗吸引装置在高位肛周脓肿治疗中的应用
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Apr 25;22(4):364-369. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.04.009.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic surgery for the treatment of rectal neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.内镜黏膜下剥离术与经肛门内镜手术治疗直肠肿瘤的比较:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2025 Mar 13;80:100613. doi: 10.1016/j.clinsp.2025.100613. eCollection 2025.
2
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection, Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, and Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Management of Rectal and Anorectal Lesions: A Narrative Review.内镜下黏膜下剥离术、内镜下黏膜切除术及经肛门微创手术治疗直肠和肛管病变:一项叙述性综述
J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 19;12(14):4777. doi: 10.3390/jcm12144777.