期刊文献+

直肠癌前切除术后吻合口漏原因的多因素分析 被引量:25

Multivariance Analysis of Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage after Anterior Peritoneal Resection of Rectal Carcinoma
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨直肠癌前切除术后发生吻合口漏的相关因素。方法 2001年1月~2009年3月,行开放(504例)或腹腔镜(65例)直肠癌前切除术569例,术后发生吻合口漏39例,发生率为6.8%(39/569)。33例(84.6%)经保守治疗,6例行横结肠造瘘术。对不同医院,术者,患者年龄(≥55岁或<55岁)、性别、吻合方式(手工或吻合器)、手术方式(腹腔镜或开放)、是否近端肠管预防性造瘘、肿瘤位置(腹膜反折以下或以上)、Duke分期的吻合口漏的发生率进行单因素分析和多因素非条件Logistic回归分析。结果 39例吻合口漏均治愈。肿瘤位置、Duke分期与吻合口漏的发生密切相关。肿瘤位于腹膜反折以下的患者吻合口漏的发生率(8.9%,28/313)是肿瘤位于腹膜反折以上者(4.3%,11/256)的2.1倍(OR=2.38,95%CI=1.13~7.12,P=0.004)。Duke分期A期吻合口漏发生率2.9%(3/104),B期6.2%(17/274),C期11.6%(16/138),D期21.4%(3/14)(OR=2.54,95%CI=1.08~6.68,P=0.011)。结论直肠癌前切除术后吻合口漏的发生与肿瘤分期及肿瘤部位密切相关。 Objective To investigate the risk factors of anastomotic leakage following anterior peritoneal resection(APR) for patients with rectal carcinoma.Methods From January 2001 to March 2009,we performed APR on totally 569 patients(open surgery in 504,and laparoscopic surgery in 65).Among the patients,39 cases developed anastomotic leakage after APR(6.8%,39/569),33 of them were cured by conservative therapy(84.6%),and the other 6 recovered after transverse colostomy.To find out risk factors for anastomotic leakage,we retrospectively analyzed the patients' clinical data,including hospital,operator,patient's age(≥55 years or 55 years) and sex,the methods for anastomosis(by hand or anastomat),surgical procedure(open or laparoscopic surgery),preventive colostomy,location of the tumor(above or under the peritoneal reflection),and Duke stage;and analyzed the relationship between the rate of anastomotic leakage and the factors by using ANOVA and logistic regression. Results All the 39 cases were cured.The location and Duke stage of the tumor were shown correlated with the incidence of the leakage.The rate of anastomotic leakage in the patients,who had the tumor under the peritoneal reflection,was 8.9%(28/313),which was 2.1 times of those who had the tumor above the peritoneal reflection(4.3%,11/256;OR=2.38,95%CI=1.13-7.12,P=0.004).In the patients with Duke A,B,C,and D,the rate of anastomotic leakage was 2.9%(3/104),6.2%(17/274),11.6%(16/138),and 21.4%(3/14) respectively(OR=2.54,95% CI=1.08-6.68,P=0.011). Conclusion Anastomotic leakage after APR of rectal carcinoma is associated with the tumor stage and location.
出处 《中国微创外科杂志》 CSCD 2011年第5期400-402,共3页 Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery
基金 浙江省温岭市科技局科技项目(2010WLCA0049)
关键词 直肠癌 吻合口漏 预防 治疗 Rectal carcinoma Anastomotic leakage Prevention Treatment
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

  • 1Eckmann C,Kujath P,Schiedeck TH,et al.Anastomotic leakage following low anterior resection:results of a standardized diagnostic and therapeutic approach.Int J Colorectal Dis,2004,19(2):128-133.
  • 2Docherty JG,Mcgregor JR,Akyol AM,et al.Comparison of manually constructed and stapled anastomoses in colorectal surgery.Ann Surg,1995,221(2):176-184.
  • 3郁宝铭.低位直肠癌外科治疗的回顾、现状与展望[J].中华普通外科杂志,2002,17(7):389-391. 被引量:118
  • 4朱倩林,冯波,陆爱国,胡伟国,王明亮,李健文,毛志海,董峰,臧潞,郑民华.腹腔镜低位直肠前切除术并发症的影响因素分析[J].中国微创外科杂志,2008,8(12):1068-1070. 被引量:9
  • 5郁宝铭,李东华,郑民华,沈耀祥,李铭.双吻合器在低位直肠癌手术中的地位(附113例分析)[J].中国实用外科杂志,1996,16(3):140-141. 被引量:129
  • 6Marusch F,Koch A,Schmidt U,et al.Value of a protective stoma in low resection for rectal cancer.Dis Colon Rectum,2002,45:1164-1171.
  • 7Gastinger I,Marusch F,Steinert R,et al.Protective defunctioning stoma in low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma.Bri J Surg,2005,92:1137-1142.
  • 8Wong NY,Eu KW.A defunctioning ileostomy does not prevent clinical anastomotic leak after a low anterior resection:a prospective,comparative study.Dis Colon Rectum,2005,48:2076-2079.
  • 9Alberts JC,Parvaiz A,Moran BJ.Predicting risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic dehiscence following rectal resection.Colorectal Dis,2003,5:478-482.

二级参考文献14

  • 1腹腔镜结肠直肠癌根治手术操作指南(2006版)[J].外科理论与实践,2006,11(5):462-464. 被引量:271
  • 2Patankar SK, Larach SW, Ferrara A, et al. Prospective comparison of laparoscopic vs. open resections for colorectal adenocarcinoma over a ten-year period. Dis Colon Rectum, 2003, 46 : 601 - 611.
  • 3Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial) : Multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2005, 365 (9472) : 1718 - 1726.
  • 4Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med, 2004, 350(20) : 2050 -2059.
  • 5Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC, et al. Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial. Lancet, 2004, 363(9416) :1187 - 1192.
  • 6Kaiser AM, Kang JC, Chan LS, et al. Laparoscopic-assisted vs. open colectomy for colon cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2004, 14 (6) :329 - 334.
  • 7Reza MM, Blasco JA, Andradas E, et al. Systematic review of laparoscopic vs. open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg, 2006, 93:921 -928.
  • 8Peeters KC, Tollenaar RA, Marijnen CA, et al. Risk factors for anastomotic failure after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer. Br J Surg, 2005, 92:211 -216.
  • 9Lipska MA, Bissett IP, Parry BR, et al. Anastomotic leakage after lower gastrointestinal anastomosis: men are at a higher risk. ANZ J Surg, 2006, 76:579-585.
  • 10Yeh CY, Changchien CR, Wang JY, et al. Pelvic drainage and other risk factors for leakage after elective anterior resection in rectal cancer patients: a prospective study of 978 patients. Ann Surg, 2005, 241:9 - 13.

共引文献251

同被引文献152

引证文献25

二级引证文献187

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部