Suppr超能文献

内镜或手术壶腹切除术治疗黏膜内壶腹肿瘤:患者人群并不相同。

Endoscopic or surgical ampullectomy for intramucosal ampullary tumor: the patient populations are not the same.

机构信息

Service de chirurgie digestive, centre hospitalier universitaire d'Amiens, 1, rond-point du Professeur-Christian-Cabrol, 80054 Amiens cedex 01, France.

Service de gastro-entérologie, centre hospitalier universitaire d'Amiens, 1, rond-point du Professeur-Christian-Cabrol, 80054 Amiens cedex 01, France.

出版信息

J Visc Surg. 2020 Jun;157(3):183-191. doi: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2019.11.002. Epub 2019 Nov 27.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the results of endoscopic ampullectomy (EA) and surgical ampullectomy (SA) for benign tumors.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

From 2005 to 2018, 66 patients were eligible for ampullectomy (adenoma, ultrasound grading≤T1, N0). The principal endpoint was the rate of complete resection: R0 resection without local recurrence and no recurrence after a single operative procedure and with final pathology confirming the operative indications. Secondary endpoints were: morbidity, mean length of stay (LOS), preoperative and final pathology results, complete (or incomplete) resection, mean duration of follow-up, local recurrence rate and late complications (biliary stricture).

RESULTS

Among the 41 patients eligible for EA, 36 ampullectomies were performed, while five were referred for SA because of intracanalar invasion that had not been diagnosed initially. The rate of complete treatment was 48% (13/27), the morbidity was 10%; the LOS was 3.3days; no adenomatous lesion was found on the definitive pathology in 9 patients (25%). The resection was R1 in 30% but there were no R2 resections. The median duration of follow-up was 20months, the rate of local recurrence was 22% and the rate of late biliary stricture was 2%. Among the 30 patients who were eligible for SA, (25 plus the five referred by endoscopists after intracanalar invasion was found), SA was eventually performed in 24: five patients were converted to pancreatoduodenectomy, one patient was found to have metastatic disease and had no resection. An extemporaneous frozen-section pathology examination was performed in 22 of the 24 SA patients and confirmed healthy margins on the bile ducts and pancreatic ducts. The rate of complete treatment was 71% (17/24), morbidity was 35%; LOS was 10days; seven patients (29%) were found to have invasive adenocarcinoma, and six of these (86%) underwent subsequent pancreatoduodenectomy. None of the resections were R1 or R2; median follow-up was 21months; there was no local recurrence; biliary stricture rate was 8%.

CONCLUSION

The short-term and long-term results of patients undergoing endoscopic or surgical ampullectomy are different. The lesions resected by EA were less advanced, with simpler postoperative course. The lesions for which SA was performed were more advanced, and had more morbid sequelae, but with a better rate of complete treatment and better long-term results.

摘要

目的

评估和比较内镜壶腹切除术(EA)和手术壶腹切除术(SA)治疗良性肿瘤的结果。

材料与方法

2005 年至 2018 年,66 例患者符合壶腹切除术适应证(腺瘤,超声分级≤T1,N0)。主要终点是完全切除率:无局部复发和单一手术过程后无复发的 R0 切除,且最终病理学证实手术适应证。次要终点是:发病率、平均住院时间(LOS)、术前和最终病理学结果、完全(或不完全)切除、平均随访时间、局部复发率和迟发性并发症(胆管狭窄)。

结果

在 41 例符合 EA 条件的患者中,行 36 例壶腹切除术,5 例因最初未诊断的腔内侵犯而转至 SA。完全治疗率为 48%(13/27),发病率为 10%;LOS 为 3.3 天;9 例(25%)患者最终病理学未见腺瘤性病变。30%的患者为 R1 切除,但无 R2 切除。中位随访时间为 20 个月,局部复发率为 22%,迟发性胆管狭窄率为 2%。在 30 例符合 SA 条件的患者中(25 例加上内镜医生发现腔内侵犯后转诊的 5 例),最终行 24 例 SA:5 例患者转为胰十二指肠切除术,1 例患者发现转移性疾病且未行切除术。24 例 SA 患者中有 22 例行临时冷冻切片病理学检查,证实胆管和胰管边缘无肿瘤。完全治疗率为 71%(17/24),发病率为 35%;LOS 为 10 天;7 例(29%)患者发现浸润性腺癌,其中 6 例(86%)行后续胰十二指肠切除术。无 1 例为 R1 或 R2 切除;中位随访时间为 21 个月;无局部复发;胆管狭窄率为 8%。

结论

行内镜或手术壶腹切除术的患者的短期和长期结果不同。EA 切除的病变进展程度较轻,术后病程较简单。行 SA 的病变进展程度较高,且有更多的术后并发症,但完全治疗率和长期结果较好。

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