Chen X H, Hu Y F, Lin T, Zhao M L, Chen T, Chen H, Mai J S, Liang Y R, Liu H, Zhao L Y, Li G X, Yu J
Department of General Surgery & Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China.
The Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China.
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022 May 25;25(5):421-432. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20220308-00091.
To compare the safety and effectiveness of esophagojejunostomy (EJS) through extracorporeal and intracorporeal methods after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). A retrospective cohort study was carried out. Clinicopathological data of 261 gastric cancer patients who underwent LTG, D2 lymphadenectomy, and Roux-en-Y EJS with complete postoperative 6-month follow-up data at the General Surgery Department of Nanfang Hospital from October 2018 to June 2021 were collected. Among these 261 patients, 139 underwent EJS with a circular stapler via mini-laparotomy (extracorporeal group), while 122 underwent intracorporeal EJS (intracorporeal group), including 43 with OrVil(TM) anastomosis (OrVil(TM) subgroup) and 79 with Overlap anastomosis (Overlap subgroup). Compared with the extracorporeal group, the intracorporeal group had higher body mass index, smaller tumor size, earlier T stage and M stage (all <0.05). Compared with the Overlap subgroup, the Orvil(TM) subgroup had higher proportions of upper gastrointestinal obstruction and esophagus involvement, and more advanced T stage (all <0.05). No other significant differences in the baseline data were found (all >0.05). The primary outcome was complications at postoperative 6-month. The secondary outcomes were operative status, intraoperative complication and postoperative recovery. Continuous variables with a skewed distribution are expressed as the median (interquartile range), and were compared using Mann-Whitney test. Categorical variables are expressed as the number and percentage and were compared with the Pearson chi-square, continuity correction or Fisher's exact test. Compared with the extracorporeal group, the intracorporeal group had smaller incision [5.0 (1.0) cm vs. 8.0 (1.0) cm, =-10.931, =0.001], lower rate of combined organ resection [0.8% (1/122) vs. 7.9% (11/139), χ(2)=7.454, =0.006] and higher rate of R0 resection [94.3% (115/122) vs. 84.9 (118/139), χ(2)=5.957, =0.015]. The morbidity of intraoperative complication in the extracorporeal group and intracorporeal group was 2.9% (4/139) and 4.1% (5/122), respectively (χ(2)=0.040, 0.842). In terms of postoperative recovery, the extracorporeal group had shorter time to liquid diet [(5.1±2.4) days vs. (5.9±3.6) days, =-2.268, =0.024] and soft diet [(7.3±3.7) days vs. (8.8±6.5) days, =-2.227, =0.027], and shorter postoperative hospital stay [(10.5±5.1) days vs. (12.2±7.7) days, =-2.108, =0.036]. The morbidity of postoperative complication within 6 months in the extracorporeal group and intracorporeal group was 25.9% (36/139) and 31.1%, (38/122) respectively (=0.348). Furthermore, there was also no significant difference in the morbidity of postoperative EJS complications [extracorporeal group vs. intracorporeal group: 5.0% (7/139) vs. 82.% (10/122), =0.302]. The severity of postoperative complications between the two groups was not statistically significant (=0.289). In the intracorporeal group, the Orvil(TM) subgroup had more estimated blood loss [100.0 (100.0) ml vs.50.0 (50.0) ml, =-2.992, =0.003] and larger incision [6.0 (1.0) cm vs. 5.0 (1.0) cm, =-3.428, =0.001] than the Overlap subgroup, seemed to have higher morbidity of intraoperative complication [7.0% (3/43) vs. 2.5% (2/79),=0.480] and postoperative complications [37.2% (16/43) vs. 27.8% (22/79), =0.286], and more severe classification of complication (=0.289). The intracorporeal EJS after LTG has similar safety to extracorporeal EJS. As for intracorporeal EJS, the Overlap method is safer and has more potential advantages than Orvil(TM) method, and is worthy of further exploration and optimization.
比较腹腔镜全胃切除术(LTG)后经体外和体内方法行食管空肠吻合术(EJS)的安全性和有效性。进行了一项回顾性队列研究。收集了2018年10月至2021年6月在南方医院普通外科接受LTG、D2淋巴结清扫和Roux-en-Y EJS且术后6个月随访数据完整的261例胃癌患者的临床病理资料。在这261例患者中,139例经迷你剖腹术使用圆形吻合器行EJS(体外组),而122例行体内EJS(体内组),其中43例采用OrVil™吻合术(OrVil™亚组),79例采用重叠吻合术(重叠亚组)。与体外组相比,体内组患者的体重指数更高、肿瘤尺寸更小、T分期和M分期更早(均P<0.05)。与重叠亚组相比,OrVil™亚组上消化道梗阻和食管受累的比例更高,T分期更晚(均P<0.05)。基线数据无其他显著差异(均P>0.05)。主要结局是术后6个月的并发症。次要结局是手术情况、术中并发症和术后恢复情况。呈偏态分布的连续变量以中位数(四分位数间距)表示,并采用Mann-Whitney检验进行比较。分类变量以例数和百分比表示,并采用Pearson卡方检验、连续性校正或Fisher确切检验进行比较。与体外组相比,体内组切口更小[5.0(1.0)cm对8.0(1.0)cm,Z=-10.931,P=0.001],联合器官切除率更低[0.8%(1/122)对7.9%(11/139),χ²=7.454,P=0.006],R0切除率更高[94.3%(115/122)对84.9%(118/139),χ²=5.957,P=0.015]。体外组和体内组术中并发症发生率分别为2.9%(4/139)和4.1%(5/122)(χ²=0.040,P=0.842)。在术后恢复方面,体外组达到清流食的时间[(5.1±2.4)天对(5.9±3.6)天,Z=-2.268,P=0.024]、软食时间[(7.3±3.7)天对(8.8±6.5)天,Z=-2.227,P=0.027]以及术后住院时间[(10.5±5.1)天对(12.2±7.7)天,Z=-2.108,P=0.036]均更短。体外组和体内组术后6个月内并发症发生率分别为25.9%(36/139)和31.1%(38/122)(P=0.348)。此外,术后EJS并发症发生率在体外组和体内组之间也无显著差异[体外组对体内组:5.0%(7/139)对8.2%(10/122),P=0.302]。两组术后并发症的严重程度无统计学差异(P=0.289)。在体内组中,OrVil™亚组比重叠亚组估计失血量更多[100.0(100.0)ml对50.0(50.0)ml,Z=-2.992,P=0.003],切口更大[6.0(1.0)cm对5.0(1.0)cm,Z=-3.428,P=0.001],术中并发症发生率似乎更高[7.0%(3/43)对2.5%(2/79),P=0.480],术后并发症发生率也更高[37.2%(16/43)对27.8%(22/79),P=0.286],并发症分级更严重(P=0.半胱氨酸蛋白酶抑制剂C(CysC)和胱抑素B(CstB)是胱抑素超家族的成员,在细胞内作为半胱氨酸蛋白酶的抑制剂发挥作用。在本研究中,我们检测了CysC和CstB在人骨肉瘤细胞系中的表达,并研究了它们对骨肉瘤细胞增殖、迁移和侵袭的影响。我们发现CysC和CstB在骨肉瘤细胞系中高表达,与正常成骨细胞系相比差异显著。通过小干扰RNA(siRNA)介导的基因沉默降低CysC或CstB的表达,显著抑制了骨肉瘤细胞的增殖、迁移和侵袭。此外,过表达CysC或CstB促进了骨肉瘤细胞的增殖、迁移和侵袭。进一步的机制研究表明,CysC和CstB通过激活丝裂原活化蛋白激酶(MAPK)信号通路发挥作用。总之,我们的研究表明CysC和CstB在骨肉瘤的发生发展中起重要作用,可能是骨肉瘤治疗的潜在靶点。 289]。LTG术后体内EJS与体外EJS具有相似的安全性。对于体内EJS,重叠法比OrVil™法更安全且具有更多潜在优势,值得进一步探索和优化。