目的 探讨腹腔镜超低位直肠癌保肛手术的可行性。方法 回顾性总结2004年9月至2007年10月期间行腹腔镜超低位直肠癌保肛手术58例患者的临床资料。结果 54例在腹腔镜下顺利完成手术，中转开腹4例，无手术死亡病例。平均手术时间187 min，术中平均失血110 ml，术后肛门排气时间平均为2.3 d。手术切除淋巴结平均为18.5个； 随访6~42个月(平均17.6个月)未见切口种植及吻合口复发。结论 腹腔镜超低位直肠癌保肛手术具有创伤小、术后恢复快等优点，可以取得比开腹手术更好的根治效果。
Objective To investigate the risk factors of liver metastasis in patients with middle and low rectal cancer of Ⅱ–Ⅲ stage after preoperative short course radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy. MethodsThe clinical data of 89 patients with middle and low rectal cancer of Ⅱ–Ⅲ stage admitted to the Dongnan Hospital of Xiamen University from January 2019 to June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were treated with short-course radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy before operation. The risk factors of postoperative liver metastasis were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. ResultsThe 89 patients were followed up for 7–53 months, with a median follow-up time of 33 months. During the follow-up period, 25 patients developed liver metastasis, the onset time was 7–35 months, and the median time of liver metastasis was 17 months. Among them, 5 patients (5.6%) developed liver metastasis in the first year after surgery, 15 patients (16.8%) developed liver metastasis at the second year after surgery, 5 patients (5.6%) developed liver metastasis at the 3rd year after surgery. Multivariate logistic regression results showed that lymph node metastasis [OR=3.550, 95%CI (1.425, 8.953), P=0.041], vascular invasion [OR=3.335, 95%CI (1.011, 11.001), P=0.048], maximum tumor diameter ≥5 cm [OR=4.477, 95%CI (1.273, 15.743), P=0.019], and peri-tumor diameter ≥1/2 [OR=4.633, 95%CI (1.387, 15.475), P=0.013] were risk factors for liver metastasis. ConclusionsLymph node metastasis, vascular invasion, maximum tumor diameter ≥5 cm, and circumferential tumor diameter ≥1/2 are risk factors for liver metastasis in patients with middle and low rectal cancer of Ⅱ–Ⅲ stage after preoperative short course radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy.
Objective To study the effect of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision and per anum rectal pull-type of anastomosis on male patients with low rectal cancer. Methods The successful experiences of anus saving operation on 23 male patients with low rectal cancer were summarized. Results A laparoscopic total mesorectal excision technique was used, with the full separation of the rectum at the bottom. After pulling out the distal rectum together with the cancer from the anus, the transection of the proximal tumor was performed. The end-to-end anastomosis of rectum and descending colon was performed by tubular stapler. Anus was reserved successfully in the 23 cases. There was no left-tumor stump after surgery detected by postoperative pathological examinations, no anastomotic leakage, and no operative death. Conclusions To the relatively narrow male pelvis, laparoscopic total mesorectal excision and per anum rectal pull-through resection and anastomosis is safe and reliable for anus saving in low rectal cancer. It can simplify the operation, and raise the success rate of sphincter preserving in surgery of low rectal cancer.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of robotic intersphincteric resection (ISR) for rectal cancer.MethodsA literature search was performed using the China biomedical literature database, Chinese CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library. The retrieval time was from the establishment of databases to April 1, 2019. Related interest indicators were brought into meta-analysis by Review Manager 5.2 software.ResultsA total of 510 patients were included in 5 studies, including 273 patients in the robot group and 237 patients in the laparoscopic group. As compared to the laparoscopic group, the robot group had significantly longer operative time [MD=43.27, 95%CI (16.48, 70.07), P=0.002], less blood loss [MD=–19.98.27, 95%CI (–33.14, –6.81), P=0.003], lower conversion rate [MD=0.20, 95%CI (0.04, –0.95), P=0.04], less lymph node harvest [MD=–1.71, 95%CI (–3.21, –0.21), P=0.03] and shorter hospital stay [MD=–1.61, 95%CI (–2.26, –0.97), P<0.000 01]. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the first flatus [MD=–0.01, 95%CI (–0.48, 0.46), P=0.96], time to diet [MD=–0.20, 95%CI (–0.67, 0.27), P=0.41], incidence of complications [OR=0.76, 95%CI (0.50, 1.14), P=0.18], distal resection margin [MD=0.00, 95%CI (–0.17, 0.17), P=0.98] and positive rate of circumferential resection margin [OR=0.61, 95%CI (0.27, 1.37), P=0.23].ConclusionsRobotic and laparoscopic ISR for rectal cancer shows comparable perioperative outcomes. Compared with laparoscopic ISR, robotic ISR has the advantages of less blood loss, lower conversion rate, and longer operation times. These findings suggest that robotic ISR is a safe and effective technique for treating low rectal cancer.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and short-term outcome of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for the middle-lower rectal cancer in municipal hospital.MethodsThe pathological data of 94 patients with middle-lower rectal cancer (49 cases underwent laparoscopic TME, while 45 cases received open TME), who treated in The First People’s Hospital of Ziyang from Jan. 2015 to Jun. 2017, were retrospectively collected and analyzed.ResultsTwo patients (4.1%) in laparoscopy group were converted to open surgery. Compared with the laparotomy group, the laparoscopic group had significantly less volume of intraoperative bleeding, shorter abdominal incision, earlier time to the first flatus and liquid diet, and lower rate of 30-day postoperative complication (P<0.05), but had longer operative time (P=0.033). While there were no significant difference on postoperative stay, the specimen length, distal margin, and number of harvested lymph nodes between the 2 groups (P>0.05).ConclusionLaparoscopic TME is a feasible, safe, and minimally invasive technique for middle-lower rectal cancer, and produce more favourable short-term outcome than open surgery in municipal hospital.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy, safety, and feasibility of fecal drainage technique on rectal anastomosis for preventing anastomotic leakage after operation for middle-low rectal cancer.MethodsThe retrospective analysis was used to collect the middle-low rectal cancer which completed operation in this hospital from 2014 to 2019. According to the way of preventing annstomotic leakage, the patients were divided into two groups: fecal drainage on rectal anastomosis group (Abbreviation: fecal drainage group) and end ileum prophylactic stoma group (Abbreviation: ileostomy group). The incidence of anastomotic leakage after operation and the different treatment methods following leakage were compared between the two groups.ResultsA total of 231 cases were recorded, including 84 cases in the fecal drainage group, 147 cases in the ileostomy group. There were no significant differences in the baseline data such as the gender, age, preoperative complications, operation mode, etc. between the two groups (P>0.050). There were no significant differences in the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incision infection, postoperative intestinal obstruction, total hospitalization cost, death, anastomotic leakage (overall, each grade, treatment, and outcome) between the two groups (P>0.050). Although the length of hospital stay except the patients with anastomotic leakage in the fecal drainage group was significantly longer than that in the ileostomy group (P<0.001), there was no significant difference in the total length of hospital stay between the two groups (P>0.050), and the incidence of anastomotic stenosis in the fecal drainage group was significantly lower than that in the ileostomy group (P=0.029).ConclusionAccording to the results of this study, fecal drainage technique on rectal anastomosis is effective, safe, and feasible in preventing anastomotic leakage after operation for middle-low rectal cancer.
目的 探讨应用双吻合器低位直肠癌前切除术后吻合口漏的早期诊断和防治措施。方法 回顾性分析 2005～2011年期间笔者所在医院收治的160例应用双吻合器行低位直肠癌前切除患者的临床资料。结果 本组患者术后发生吻合口漏13例（8.1%），发生吻合口漏的时间为术后 3～12d，平均7d；8例经保守治疗后治愈，4 例经二次手术行结肠或回盲部造瘘后好转，1 例于术后12d死亡。结论 直肠癌前切除术后吻合口漏的早期正确诊断和合理治疗是降低患者死亡率的关键；早期的造瘘手术和通畅引流是治愈吻合口漏的必要措施。
目的:探讨保留肛门外括约肌低位直肠癌保肛手术的应用。方法: 在全直肠系膜切除的基础上,应用国产一次性管状吻合器,对32例低位直肠癌行保留肛门外括约肌超低位结肛吻合,随访12～36个月。回顾性分析其根治性、术后排便功能、手术并发症、局部复发率。结果: 全组病例术后病理检查无切端癌残留,无大便失禁,无吻合口漏;全组无手术死亡;肿瘤局部复发率9.4%(3/32)。结论: 低位直肠癌保留肛门外括约肌保肛手术,遵循肿瘤根治的原则下,能保留患者正常的肛门排便功能,明显改善该类患者的生活质量。
ObjectiveTo analyze the common reasons of anastomotic leakage following sphincter preservation for rectal cancer, and to explore the better prevention and treatment strategies. MethodThe related literatures of the definition, common causes, and prevention and treatment status of anastomotic leakage were reviewed. ResultsCurrently rectal cancer was one of common malignant tumors, including about 2/3 low rectal cancer.Recently, sphincter preserving surgery had become the preferred surgical procedure.However, the incidence of anastomotic leakage keeping in higher was still the most serious and common complications.Through improving the general condition of the patients, improving surgical techniques, and standardized treatment could effectively reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage. ConclusionReasonable preoperative assessment for the basic situation of patients with rectal cancer, standardized and individualized treatments, contribute to reduce incidence of anastomotic leakage and improve clinical outcomes in patients with low rectal cancer.
ObjectiveTo investigate current status of anal sphincter preservation in low rectal cancer.MethodThe recent literatures on the progress of anal sphincter preservation in the low rectal cancer were reviewed.ResultsIn the past, the surgical treatment of the low rectal cancer was mainly based on the Miles. With the deepening of the anatomical understanding, the improvement of surgical concepts, and the development of minimally invasive techniques, the treatment concept of the low rectal cancer had gradually entered the era of retaining anal and anal function. At present, many surgical methods including the transanal local excision, intersphincteric resection, transanal total mesorectal excision, etc. could be applied to the anal sphincter preservation of the lower rectal cancer, but the advantages and disadvantages of each surgical procedure and the scope of application were slightly different.ConclusionsAlthough there are many surgical procedures that can be applied to patients with low rectal cancer, none of them can achieve perfection in terms of retaining anal and anal function, reducing complications and recurrence rates, and improving survival. It is believed that with continuous understanding of rectal anatomy by surgeons, emergence of various neoadjuvant chemoradiation and new devices, and more anal sphincter preservation procedures and even artificial anal surgery, treatment of low rectal cancer will also be more good care for anal and maintenance function, so that patients can obtain a higher quality and a long-term survival opportunity.