Suppr超能文献

一期腹腔镜肝段切除术治疗双侧结直肠癌肝转移:安全性、复发模式和肿瘤学结果。

One-stage laparoscopic parenchymal sparing liver resection for bilobar colorectal liver metastases: safety, recurrence patterns and oncologic outcomes.

机构信息

Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, President Kennedylaan 4, 8500, Kortrijk, Belgium.

Department of Oncology and Statistics, Groeninge Hospital Kortrijk, Kortrijk, Belgium.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2022 Feb;36(2):1018-1026. doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08366-5. Epub 2021 Mar 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) of bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) are challenging and the safety and long-term outcomes are unclear. In this study, the short- and long-term outcomes and recurrence patterns of one-stage LLR for bilobar CRLM were compared to single laparoscopic resection for CRLM.

METHODS

This single-center study consisted of all patients who underwent a parenchymal sparing LLR for CRLM between October 2011 and December 2018. Demographics, perioperative outcomes, short-term outcomes, oncologic outcomes and recurrence patterns were compared. Data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

Thirty six patients underwent a LLR for bilobar CRLM and ninety patients underwent a single LLR. Demographics were similar among groups. More patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the bilobar group (55.6% vs 34.4%, P = 0.03). There was no difference in conversion rate, R0 resection and transfusion rate. Blood loss and operative time were higher in the bilobar group (250 ml (IQR 150-450) vs 100 ml (IQR 50-250), P < 0.001 and 200 min (IQR 170-230) vs 130 min (IQR 100-165), P < 0.001) and hospital stay was longer (5 days (IQR 4-7) vs 4 days (IQR 3-6), P = 0.015). The bilobar group had more technically major resections (88.9% vs 56.7%, P < 0.001). Mortality was nil in both groups and major morbidity was similar (2.8% vs 3.3%, P = 1.0). There was no difference in recurrence pattern. Overall survival (OS) was similar (1 yr: 96% in both groups and 5 yr 76% vs 66%, P = 0.49), as was recurrence-free survival (RFS) (1 yr: 64% vs 73%, 3 yr: 38 vs 42%, 5 yr: 38% vs 28%, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, LLR for bilobar CRLM can be performed safely with similar oncologic outcomes as patients who underwent a single LLR for CRLM.

摘要

背景与目的

腹腔镜肝切除术(LLR)治疗双侧结直肠癌肝转移(CRLM)具有挑战性,其安全性和长期疗效尚不清楚。本研究比较了同期行双侧 CRLM 的 LLR 与单侧腹腔镜肝切除术(LLR)的短期和长期疗效及复发模式。

方法

本单中心研究纳入 2011 年 10 月至 2018 年 12 月期间行保留肝实质的 LLR 治疗 CRLM 的所有患者。比较两组患者的人口统计学、围手术期结局、短期结局、肿瘤学结局和复发模式。数据来自前瞻性维护的数据库。

结果

36 例患者行双侧 LLR 治疗双侧 CRLM,90 例患者行单侧 LLR。两组患者的人口统计学特征相似。双侧组接受新辅助化疗的患者比例更高(55.6% vs 34.4%,P=0.03)。两组的中转率、R0 切除率和输血率无差异。双侧组的术中出血量和手术时间更高(250ml(IQR 150-450)vs 100ml(IQR 50-250),P<0.001 和 200min(IQR 170-230)vs 130min(IQR 100-165),P<0.001),住院时间更长(5d(IQR 4-7)vs 4d(IQR 3-6),P=0.015)。双侧组更倾向于行技术上较大的肝切除术(88.9% vs 56.7%,P<0.001)。两组均无死亡病例,主要并发症发生率相似(2.8% vs 3.3%,P=1.0)。两组的复发模式无差异。总生存(OS)相似(1 年:两组均为 96%,5 年:76% vs 66%,P=0.49),无复发生存(RFS)也相似(1 年:64% vs 73%,3 年:38% vs 42%,5 年:38% vs 28%,P=0.62)。

结论

在有经验的医生手中,同期行双侧 CRLM 的 LLR 可安全实施,且肿瘤学结局与单侧 LLR 治疗 CRLM 的患者相似。

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