• 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

全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术后的生活质量:一项倾向评分匹配的回顾性队列研究

[Quality of life after totally laparoscopic versus laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: a retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching].

作者信息

Lin G T, Chen J Y, Wu D, Lin J X, Huang C M

机构信息

Department of Gastric Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350004, China.

出版信息

Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Aug 25;25(8):699-707. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20220301-00074.

DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20220301-00074
PMID:35970804
Abstract

To evaluate the postoperative quality of life in patients after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG). A retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching was performed. Clinical and follow-up data of patients who underwent laparoscopic radical gastrectomy at Union Hospital of Fujian Medical University from January 2014 to May 2015 were collected. Case indusion criteria: (1) primary gastric cancer confirmed by postoperative pathology; (2) receiving TLTG or laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG);(3) R0 resection; (4) completing follow-up for 12 months and complete follow-up data. Exclusion criteria: (1) gastric stump cancer; (2) concurrent tumor; (3) distal metastasis found during operation; (4) history of upper abdominal operation. According to surgical procedures, patients were divided into the LATG group (1076 cases) and the TLTG group (106 cases). To eliminate potential bias in baseline data between the two groups, the propensity score was calculated using a logistic regression model with the following covariates, including age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor location, tumor size, pathology type, and stage. The two groups were matched using a 1:2 propensity assessment ratio and a caliper width of 0.01 standard deviation was specified. The primary outcomes were the quality of life of the two groups at 3, 6 and 12 months after gastrectomy, including physical symptoms and social function. Higher function score indicated better function, and higher symptom score presented worse symptoms. Quality of life score = (100 - somatic symptom scale score + social function scale score) / 2. The secondary outcomes were postoperative nutritional recovery and food tolerance at 3, 6 and 12 months after gastrectomy. The categorical variables were expressed as (%), and compared using the χ test or Fisher exact test. The continuous variables conforming to the normal distribution were represented by Mean ± SD and compared with the paired t-test. Repeated measurement of variance was used to compare nutrition-related indicators within the group among pre-operation, postoperative 1, 3, 6, 12 months. After PSM, there were no significant differences in clinicopathological baseline data between the TLTG group (=104) and the LATG group (=208) (all >0.05). The physical symptoms scores in the TLTG group before operation and 3, 6 and 12 months after operation were 8.6±5.8, 15.5±8.4, 10.1±5.9 and 6.1±2.4 respectively (=43.493, <0.001). In the LATG group, the above mentioned scores were 9.7±6.9, 23.7±10.4, 13.3±8.3 and 8.5±4.2 respectively (=112.588, <0.001). Compared with the LATG group, the symptom scores in the TLTG group were lower at 3 and 6 months after operation, and the differences were statistically significant (=-3.653, <0.001; =-2.513, =0.012). At 12 months after operation, although the physical symptom score in the TLTG group was also lower than that in LATG group, the difference was not statistically significant (=-1.487, =0.138). The social function scores in the TLTG group before operation and 3, 6 and 12 months after operation were 90.3±8.9, 77.5±14.3, 87.4±10.3 and 91.7±6.7 respectively (=28.524, <0.001). In the LATG group, the above mentioned scores were 92.5±6.3, 68.5±16.8, 79.8±14.7 and 84.7±11.1 respectively (=57.975, <0.001). Compared with the LATG group, the social function scores of patients in the LATG group were higher at 3, 6 and 12 months after operation (=3.543, <0.001; =3.216, =0.001; =2.235, =0.026). The total scores of quality of life at 3, 6 and 12 months after operation in the TLTG group were 81.0±15.6, 88.3±8.1 and 93.3±9.1 respectively, and the above mentioned scores in the LATG group were 72.4±13.6, 83.3±11.5 and 88.1±7.7 respectively, whose differences at corresponding time point were all significant between the two groups (all <0.05). The change of total body mass[(-8.4±1.4)% vs. (-13.2±1.6)%, =2.273, =0.024], serum albumin[(-5.1±0.7)% vs. (-7.4±0.8)%,=2.095, =0.037], meal quantity [(-15.6±4.7)% vs. (-24.1±6.0)%, =2.885, =0.004] and meal times [(20.8±7.1)% vs. (30.6±11.5)%, =3.043, <0.001] in the TLTG group were significantly lower than those in the LATG group one year after operation (all <0.05). At 3, 6 and 12 months after operation, the diet proportions of solid and soft food in the TLTG group were higher than those in the LATG group (all <0.05). Compared with LATG, patients with gastric cancer undergoing TLTG have better health-related quality of life and faster recovery of nutrition.

摘要

评估全腹腔镜全胃切除术(TLTG)患者术后的生活质量。进行了一项基于倾向评分匹配的回顾性队列研究。收集了2014年1月至2015年5月在福建医科大学附属协和医院接受腹腔镜根治性胃切除术患者的临床和随访数据。病例纳入标准:(1)术后病理确诊为原发性胃癌;(2)接受TLTG或腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术(LATG);(3)R0切除;(4)完成12个月的随访且随访数据完整。排除标准:(1)胃残端癌;(2)并发肿瘤;(3)手术中发现远处转移;(4)上腹部手术史。根据手术方式,将患者分为LATG组(1076例)和TLTG组(106例)。为消除两组间基线数据的潜在偏差,使用包含年龄、性别、体重指数、美国麻醉医师协会评分、肿瘤位置、肿瘤大小、病理类型和分期等协变量的逻辑回归模型计算倾向评分。两组采用1:2的倾向评估比例进行匹配,并指定卡尺宽度为0.01标准差。主要结局是胃切除术后3、6和12个月两组的生活质量,包括身体症状和社会功能。功能评分越高表明功能越好,症状评分越高表明症状越差。生活质量评分=(100 - 躯体症状量表评分 + 社会功能量表评分)/2。次要结局是胃切除术后3、6和12个月的术后营养恢复和食物耐受性。分类变量以(%)表示,采用χ检验或Fisher精确检验进行比较。符合正态分布的连续变量以Mean±SD表示,并采用配对t检验进行比较。采用重复测量方差分析比较术前、术后1、3、6、12个月组内营养相关指标。倾向评分匹配后,TLTG组(n = 104)和LATG组(n = 208)的临床病理基线数据无显著差异(均P>0.05)。TLTG组术前及术后3、6和12个月的身体症状评分分别为8.6±5.8、15.5±8.4、10.1±5.9和6.1±2.4(F = 43.493,P<0.001)。LATG组上述评分分别为9.7±6.9、23.7±10.4、13.3±8.3和8.5±4.2(F = 112.588,P<0.001)。与LATG组相比,TLTG组术后3和6个月的症状评分较低,差异有统计学意义(t = -3.653,P<0.001;t = -2.513,P = 0.012)。术后12个月,TLTG组的身体症状评分虽也低于LATG组,但差异无统计学意义(t = -1.487,P = 0.138)。TLTG组术前及术后3、6和12个月的社会功能评分分别为90.3±8.9、77.5±14.3、87.4±10.3和91.7±6.7(F = 28.524,P<0.001)。LATG组上述评分分别为92.5±6.3、68.5±16.8、79.8±14.7和84.7±11.1(F = 57.975,P<0.001)。与LATG组相比,TLTG组患者术后3、6和12个月的社会功能评分较高(t = 3.543,P<0.001;t = 3.216,P = 0.001;t = 2.235,P = 0.026)。TLTG组术后3、6和12个月的生活质量总分分别为81.0±15.6、88.3±8.1和93.3±9.1,LATG组上述评分分别为72.4±13.6、83.3±11.5和88.1±7.7,两组在相应时间点的差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。术后1年,TLTG组总体重的变化[(-8.4±1.4)% vs. (-13.2±1.6)%,t = 2.273,P = 0.024])、血清白蛋白[(-5.1±0.7)% vs. (-7.4±0.8)%,t = 2.095,P = 0.037]、进食量[(-15.6±4.7)% vs. (-24.1±6.0)%,t = 2.885,P = 0.004]和进食次数[(20.8±7.1)% vs. (30.6±11.5)%,t = 3.043,P<0.001]均显著低于LATG组(均P<0.05)。术后3、6和12个月,TLTG组固体和软食的饮食比例高于LATG组(均P<0.05)。与LATG相比,接受TLTG的胃癌患者具有更好的健康相关生活质量和更快的营养恢复。

相似文献

1
[Quality of life after totally laparoscopic versus laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: a retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching].全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术后的生活质量:一项倾向评分匹配的回顾性队列研究
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Aug 25;25(8):699-707. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20220301-00074.
2
Patient-Reported Outcomes of Individuals with Gastric Cancer Undergoing Totally Laparoscopic Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Total Gastrectomy: A Real-World, Propensity Score-Matching Analysis.接受全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术的胃癌患者的报告结局:真实世界、倾向评分匹配分析。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Mar;30(3):1759-1769. doi: 10.1245/s10434-022-12764-x. Epub 2022 Nov 22.
3
Postoperative morbidity and quality of life between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy and laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy: a propensity-score matched analysis.全腹腔镜全胃切除术与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术术后发病率和生活质量的比较:倾向评分匹配分析。
BMC Cancer. 2021 Sep 11;21(1):1016. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08744-1.
4
A comparative study of the short-term operative outcome between intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses during laparoscopic total gastrectomy.腹腔镜全胃切除术中管腔内吻合与管腔外吻合的短期手术效果比较研究。
Surg Endosc. 2021 Apr;35(4):1602-1609. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07539-y. Epub 2020 Apr 8.
5
Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler in patients with gastric cancer: A single-center experience.内镜直线型切割闭合器全腹腔镜全胃切除术与管状吻合器腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术治疗胃癌的对比:单中心经验。
World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Dec 28;23(48):8553-8561. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i48.8553.
6
Surgical outcomes and prognosis of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matching study.腹腔镜全胃切除术后体内与体外食管空肠吻合术治疗胃癌的手术结果及预后:一项倾向评分匹配研究
Sci Rep. 2024 Aug 1;14(1):17793. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67681-8.
7
Comparison of Reduced Port Totally Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy (Duet TLTG) and Conventional Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy.缩小切口全腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术(Duet TLTG)与传统腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术的比较
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016 Dec;26(6):e132-e136. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000329.
8
Comparison efficacy and safety of total laparoscopic gastrectomy and laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy in treatment of gastric cancer.全腹腔镜胃癌根治术与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术治疗胃癌的疗效及安全性比较
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024 Jun 27;16(6):1871-1882. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v16.i6.1871.
9
Digestive tract reconstruction using isoperistaltic jejunum-later-cut overlap method after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Short-term outcomes and impact on quality of life.全腹腔镜胃癌根治术后应用等蠕动空肠-后段重叠法重建消化道:短期疗效及对生活质量的影响。
World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Oct 21;23(39):7129-7138. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i39.7129.
10
[A comparative study on short-term outcomes and quality of life for gastric cancer patients between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler].[使用内镜直线切割吻合器的全腹腔镜全胃切除术与使用圆形吻合器的腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术治疗胃癌患者的短期疗效及生活质量的比较研究]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Feb 25;25(2):157-165. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20210430-00185.

引用本文的文献

1
Safety and effectiveness of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy vs laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: a meta-analysis.完全腹腔镜全胃切除术与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术的安全性和有效性:一项荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2024 Feb 1;110(2):1245-1265. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000921.