• 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

[机器人辅助手术与传统腹腔镜手术治疗Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌患者手术并发症的分级评估及相关危险因素分析]

[Grading evaluation of operative complications and analysis of related risk factors in patients with stage Ⅰ endometrial cancer treated by robotic-assisted and traditional laparoscopic surgery].

作者信息

Guo R X, Du J M, Wang P R, Li B J, Li L X, Wang Q, Bai J

机构信息

Department of Gynecology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, China.

出版信息

Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2020 Feb 25;55(2):112-119. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567X.2020.02.010.

DOI:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567X.2020.02.010
PMID:32146740
Abstract

To investigate the surgical complications in the treatment of stage Ⅰ endometrial cancer by robotic-assisted laparoscopy, the risk degree of Clavein-Dindo complications and the main risk factors affecting the occurrence of surgical complications. A retrospective case-control study was conducted in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from October 2014 to June 2019. The patients were divided into robotic-assisted laparoscopy group and traditional laparoscopy group according to the operation mode, including 131 cases in robot group and 290 cases in traditional laparoscopy group. To compare the complications during and after operation and the risk degree of complications between the two groups by Clavein-Dindo classification standard, the age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, past history of pelvic surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, preoperative anemia, number of pelvic lymph node resection, number of abdominal aortic lymph node resection, the total number of lymph node resection, operation time, surgical methods (robot surgery or traditional laparoscopic surgery) and other clinicopathological data were analyzed by logistic regression analysis. (1) Complications of operation: the incidence of operative complications (including intraoperative and postoperative complications) in robot group was significantly lower than that in traditional laparoscopy group [(20.6%, 27/131) vs (34.8%, 101/290); χ(2)=8.620, =0.003)]. The incidence of intraoperative complications in robot group was lower than that in traditional laparoscopy group [1.5% (2/131) vs 6.2% (18/290); χ(2)=4.368, =0.037]. The incidence of intraoperative vascular injury in robot group was significantly lower than that in traditional laparoscopy group [0.8% (1/131) vs 5.2% (15/290); χ(2)=4.798, =0.022]. The incidence of postoperative complications in robot group was also lower than that in traditional laparoscopy group [19.1% (25/131) vs 28.6% (83/290); χ(2)=4.303, =0.038], but the incidence of postoperative lymphatic leakage in robot group was higher than that in traditional laparoscopy group [10.7% (14/131) vs 5.2% (15/290); χ(2)=4.279, =0.039]. (2) Clavein-Dindo classification: the incidence of Clavein-Dindo Ⅰ, Ⅲ, Ⅲ, Ⅳ and Ⅴ grade between two groups were respectively 3.8% (5/131) vs 11.0% (32/290), 13.7% (18/131) vs 14.5% (42/290), 3.1% (4/131) vs 8.6% (25/290), 0 (0/131) vs 0.3% (1/290), 0 (0/131) vs 0.3% (1/290), and the incidence of grade Ⅰ (χ(2)=5.684, =0.015) and Ⅲ (χ(2)=4.361, =0.037) complications were statistically significant. The incidence of severe complications in robot group (grade Ⅲ and above) was lower than that in traditional laparoscopy group [3.1% (4/131) vs 9.3% (27/290); χ(2)=5.179, =0.023]. (3) Analysis of influencing factors of surgical complications: univariate analysis showed that BMI (χ(2)=15.801, =0.000), preoperative anemia (χ(2)=14.299, =0.000), total number of lymph node resection (χ(2)=10.425, =0.001), surgical methods (χ(2)=8.620, =0.003) were related to the occurrence of surgical complications of endometrial carcinoma. Multivariate analysis showed that BMI (=0.289, 95%: 0.097-0.864, =0.026), preoperative anemia (=0.309, 95%: 0.129-0.740, =0.008), the total number of lymph node resection (=0.624, 95%: 0.403-0.966, =0.034) and surgical methods (=3.491, 95%: 1.030-11.840, =0.045) were independent risk factors for surgical complications of endometrial carcinoma. Compared with traditional laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has fewer complications and lower incidence of severe complications. BMI, preoperative anemia, the total number of lymph node resection and surgical methods are independent risk factors for the occurrence of surgical complications of stage Ⅰ endometrial cancer.

摘要

为探讨机器人辅助腹腔镜治疗Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌的手术并发症、Clavien-Dindo并发症风险程度及影响手术并发症发生的主要危险因素。于2014年10月至2019年6月在郑州大学第一附属医院进行一项回顾性病例对照研究。根据手术方式将患者分为机器人辅助腹腔镜组和传统腹腔镜组,机器人组131例,传统腹腔镜组290例。采用Clavien-Dindo分类标准比较两组手术中和术后并发症及并发症风险程度,通过logistic回归分析年龄、体重指数(BMI)、合并症、盆腔手术既往史、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级、术前贫血、盆腔淋巴结切除数量、腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除数量、淋巴结切除总数、手术时间、手术方式(机器人手术或传统腹腔镜手术)等临床病理资料。(1)手术并发症:机器人组手术并发症(包括术中及术后并发症)发生率显著低于传统腹腔镜组[(20.6%,27/131) vs (34.8%,101/290);χ²=8.620,P=0.003]。机器人组术中并发症发生率低于传统腹腔镜组[1.5%(2/131) vs 6.2%(18/290);χ²=4.368,P=0.037]。机器人组术中血管损伤发生率显著低于传统腹腔镜组[0.8%(1/131) vs 5.2%(15/290);χ²=4.798,P=0.022]。机器人组术后并发症发生率也低于传统腹腔镜组[19.1%(25/131) vs 28.6%(83/290);χ²=4.303,P=0.038],但机器人组术后淋巴漏发生率高于传统腹腔镜组[10.7%(14/131) vs 5.2%(15/290);χ²=4.279,P=0.039]。(2)Clavien-Dindo分类:两组Clavien-DindoⅠ、Ⅲ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ和Ⅴ级发生率分别为3.8%(5/131) vs 11.0%(32/290)、13.7%(18/131) vs 14.5%(42/290)、3.1%(4/131) vs 8.6%(25/290)、0(0/131) vs 0.3%(1/290)、0(0/131) vs 0.3%(1/290),Ⅰ级(χ²=5.684,P=0.015)和Ⅲ级(χ²=4.361,P=0.037)并发症发生率差异有统计学意义。机器人组严重并发症(Ⅲ级及以上)发生率低于传统腹腔镜组[3.1%(4/131) vs 9.3%(27/290);χ²=5.179,P=0.023]。(3)手术并发症影响因素分析:单因素分析显示BMI(χ²=15.801,P=0.000)、术前贫血(χ²=14.299,P=0.000)、淋巴结切除总数(χ²=10.425,P=0.001)、手术方式(χ²=8.620,P=0.003)与子宫内膜癌手术并发症发生有关。多因素分析显示BMI(β=0.289,95%CI:0.097-0.864,P=0.026)、术前贫血(β=0.309,95%CI:0.129-0.740,P=0.008)、淋巴结切除总数(β=0.624,95%CI:0.403-0.966,P=0.034)和手术方式(β=3.491,95%CI:1.030-11.840,P=0.045)是子宫内膜癌手术并发症的独立危险因素。与传统腹腔镜手术相比,机器人辅助腹腔镜手术并发症更少,严重并发症发生率更低。BMI、术前贫血、淋巴结切除总数和手术方式是Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌手术并发症发生的独立危险因素。

相似文献

1
[Grading evaluation of operative complications and analysis of related risk factors in patients with stage Ⅰ endometrial cancer treated by robotic-assisted and traditional laparoscopic surgery].[机器人辅助手术与传统腹腔镜手术治疗Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌患者手术并发症的分级评估及相关危险因素分析]
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2020 Feb 25;55(2):112-119. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567X.2020.02.010.
2
Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial.机器人辅助手术与传统腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌:一项随机对照试验
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Nov;215(5):588.e1-588.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.005. Epub 2016 Jun 8.
3
[Effects of robotic and laparoscopic-assisted surgery on lymph node dissection and short-term outcomes in patients with Siewert II adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction].[机器人手术与腹腔镜辅助手术对食管胃交界部Siewert II型腺癌患者淋巴结清扫及短期预后的影响]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Feb 25;22(2):156-163.
4
Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer.机器人辅助子宫切除术和淋巴结切除术的学习曲线和手术结果:与腹腔镜和开腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的病例对照比较。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Nov-Dec;17(6):739-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.07.008.
5
[Application of robot-assisted laparoscopic sentinel lymph node tracing in treating endometrial carcinoma].机器人辅助腹腔镜前哨淋巴结示踪在子宫内膜癌治疗中的应用
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Nov 25;57(11):830-835. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112141-20221009-00621.
6
A prospective, comparative study on robotic versus open-surgery hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for endometrial carcinoma.一项关于机器人辅助与开放手术子宫切除术及盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗子宫内膜癌的前瞻性比较研究。
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015 Feb;25(2):250-6. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000357.
7
[Robot assisted endometrial cancer staging - evaluation the first 100 operations and comparing the first andthe last 30 operations].[机器人辅助子宫内膜癌分期——对前100例手术的评估以及前30例与后30例手术的比较]
Ceska Gynekol. 2015 Oct;80(5):324-32.
8
Security and Radical Assessment in Open, Laparoscopic, Robotic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Comparative Study.开放、腹腔镜及机器人辅助结直肠癌手术中的安全性与根治性评估:一项对比研究
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Jan 1;17:1533033818794160. doi: 10.1177/1533033818794160.
9
[Efficacy comparison between robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer: a prospective randomized controlled trial].机器人辅助与腹腔镜手术治疗中低位直肠癌的疗效比较:一项前瞻性随机对照试验
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2020 Apr 25;23(4):377-383. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn.441530-20190401-00135.
10
[Comparison of complications following open, laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy].[开放手术、腹腔镜手术及机器人辅助胃切除术后并发症的比较]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2017 Feb 25;20(2):184-189.

引用本文的文献

1
A comparison of surgical outcomes among robotic cases performed with an employed surgical assist versus a second surgeon as the assist.比较使用雇佣的手术助理与第二位外科医生作为助理进行的机器人手术的手术结果。
J Robot Surg. 2022 Feb;16(1):229-233. doi: 10.1007/s11701-021-01230-7. Epub 2021 Mar 26.
2
Auricular therapy improves gastrointestinal function in patients with gynecological laparoscopic surgery: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.耳穴疗法改善妇科腹腔镜手术患者的胃肠功能:一项系统评价与Meta分析方案
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Dec 4;99(49):e23421. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023421.