腹腔镜直肠癌腹会阴联合切除术的三大难题及其解决方案

Three major problems and solutions in laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for rectal carcinoma

目的探讨腹腔镜直肠癌腹会阴联合切除术（APR）中的三大难题（腹部无切口的前提下完成腹膜外乙状结肠造口、缝合封闭盆底腹膜和预防术后会阴切口感染）及其解决方案。方法回顾性分析2010年9月至2013年5月间在北京协和医院基本外科接受择期腹腔镜APR手术60例低位直肠癌患者的临床资料。术中在完成淋巴结清扫及肿瘤切除后，以左下腹穿刺点为中心行腹腔镜下腹膜外乙状结肠造口术：并借鉴经肛门内镜微创手术（TEM）独特的腔内缝合技术，使用TEM持针钳，用可吸收线连续缝合关闭盆底腹膜；对成功关闭盆底腹膜的患者于术后第3天开始行骶前间隙持续灌洗预防会阴切口感染。结果计划实施腹腔镜APR的60例患者中，除1例（1．7％）中转开腹外，59例（98-3％）顺利完成腹部无切口的腹膜外乙状结肠造VI术，造口并发症发生率3．4％（2／59）。56例（94．9％）成功缝合关闭盆底腹膜，中位缝合耗时为15min，术后无一例出现会阴疝、腹内疝或粘连性肠梗阻。57例（包括中转开腹1例）成功关闭盆底腹膜后行骶前间隙持续灌洗者，骶前引流管留置的中位时间为7．8d；术后未并发粘连性肠梗阻：会阴切口甲、乙和丙级愈合率分别为87．7％（50／57）、8．8％（5／57）和3．5％（2／57）。盆底腹膜缝合失败、骶前间隙自然引流的3例患者术后1例发生粘连性肠梗阻，1例会阴切口丙级愈合。结论腹腔镜APR手术中腹膜外乙状结肠造口可行且安全；采用TEM腔内缝合技术关闭盆底腹膜便捷而有效；术后持续骶前灌洗对预防会阴切口感染的作用值得深入探讨。

Objective To investigate the three major problems and solutions in laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection （APR） for rectal carcinoma. Methods A retrospective study of 60 low rectal carcinoma cases undergoing selective laparoscopic APR from September 2010 to May 2013 in our hospital was undertaken. A laparoscopic sigmoid stoma was performed through the extraperitoneal route at the left lower abdomen puncture point after lymphadenectomy and tumor excision during operation. Using the unique intracorporeal suture technique of transanal endoscopic microsurgery （TEM）, the pelvic peritoneum was closed by continuous suture with TEM needle-forceps and absorbable suture. Those patients with the successful pelvic peritoneum closure received continuous irrigation of presacral space fYom the third postoperative day to prevent perineal incision infection. Results Only one patient （1.7%） was converted to laparotomy. Fifty-nine patients underwent laparoscopic APR and laparoscopic sigmoid stoma was successfully performed through the extraperitoneal route without abdominal incision, and the incidence of stoma complication was only 3.4%. Out of 59 patients undergoing laparoscopie APR, the pelvic peritoneum of 56 patients （94.9%） was closed successfully. The median time of closing the pelvic peritoneum was 15 rain. Fifty-seven patients with pelvic peritoneum successfully closed by laparotomy or laparoscopic approach received continuous irrigation of presacral space and the median time of presacral drainage tube placement was 7.8 days. No patient developed postoperative intestinal obstruction. The rate of perineal wound healing in grade A, B and C was 87.7%, 8.8% and 3.5%, respectively. In the 3 patients whose pelvic peritoneum failed to be closed with simple drainage of presacral space, one developed postoperative intestinal obstruction and one had a grade C perineal wound healing. Conclusions Laparoscopic sigmoid stoma through the extraperitoneal route during laparoscopic APR for rectal carcinoma is feasible and safe. It is convenient and effective to close pelvic peritoneum by using TEM intracorporeal suture technique. It is worth discussing the role of continuous irrigation of presacral space postoperatively to prevent perineal incision infection.