期刊文献+

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗胃来源且长径大于2cm的胃肠间质瘤多中心倾向评分匹配法疗效比较 被引量:10

Efficacy comparison between laparoscopy and open surgery in the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 2 cm using multicenter propensity score matching method
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的对比腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗胃来源的胃肠间质瘤(GIST)的临床疗效。方法采用多中心回顾性队列研究方法。病例纳入标准:直径>2 cm的原发性胃GIST;接受开腹或腹腔镜手术治疗;经术后病理确诊且无远处转移;未接受术前靶向药物治疗。收集2010年1月1日至2017年5月1日期间,解放军总医院(320例)、上海交通大学医学院附属仁济医院(284例)、华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院(175例)及天津医科大学肿瘤医院(78例)共计857例患者的临床病理资料,其中444例行开腹手术(开腹组),413例行腹腔镜手术(腔镜组)。应用倾向性评分匹配的最近邻匹配法对开腹组与腔镜组的肿瘤部位和肿瘤大小进行1∶1匹配,卡钳值为0.04;采用t检验、χ^2检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验比较两组患者短期疗效,采用Kaplan-Meier曲线和log rank检验比较长期预后。结果倾向评分匹配后,两组分别纳入293例患者,两组患者性别、年龄、肿瘤部位、肿瘤长径以及改良美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)分级等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。与开腹组相比,腔镜组术中出血量少者比例高[<100 ml比例:52.9%(155/293)比36.2%(106/293),Z=-12.857,P<0.001],术后进食时间[(4.0±0.2)d比(5.3±0.9)d,t=1.505,P=0.003]和引流管拔除时间较早[(4.8±1.0)d比(6.5±1.0)d,t=1.847,P=0.008],术后住院时间较短[(8.6±0.3)d比(10.5±0.3)d,t=4.235,P<0.001]。按照解剖部位进行亚组分析:(1)胃贲门部及幽门部:两组围手术期指标差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。(2)胃底部:腔镜组较开腹组术后进食时间早[(4.0±0.2)d比(4.5±0.2)d,t=0.512,P=0.038]、引流管拔除时间[(5.1±0.4)d比(6.4±0.6)d,t=0.517,P=0.044]和术后住院时间[(8.0±0.5)d比(11.1±0.9)d,t=0.500,P=0.002]明显缩短,而其他围手术期指标差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。(3)胃小弯侧:腔镜组的术中出血量[<100 ml比例:58.1%(43/74)比33.7%(25/74),Z=7.632,P=0.034]、胃管拔出时间[(2.7±0.2)d比(3.2±0.3)d,t=0.503,P=0.007]、术后排气时间[(2.8±0.1)d比(3.4±0.2)d,t=0.532,P=0.030]、术后进食时间[(3.6±0.2)d比(4.3±0.2)d,t=0.508,P=0.020]、引流管拔除时间[(4.2±0.4)d比(5.7±0.5)d,t=0.508,P=0.020]及术后住院时间[(8.3±0.6)d比(10.7±0.3)d,t=0.502,P=0.006]均优于开腹组。(4)胃大弯侧:腔镜组术中出血量[<100 ml比例:52.7%(39/74)比36.5%(27/74),Z=7.681,P=0.032]、胃管拔出时间[(2.6±0.2)d比(3.6±0.2)d,t=0.501,P=0.001]、术后排气时间[(2.7±0.2)d比(3.4±0.2)d,t=0.501,P=0.016]、术后进食时间[(3.6±0.2)d比(4.7±0.2)d,t=0.500,P=0.001]、引流管拔除时间[(4.0±0.5)d比(5.9±0.4)d,t=0.508,P=0.002]及术后住院时间[(7.5±0.3)d比(9.5±0.1)d,t=0.500,P=0.001]均优于开腹组。按肿瘤大小进行亚组分析:(1)肿瘤长径2.0~5.0 cm组:腔镜组的排气时间[(2.9±0.1)d比(3.5±0.1)d,t=0.500,P=0.001]、术后进食时间[(4.5±0.1)d比(5.0±0.2)d,t=0.501,P=0.013]、引流管拔除时间[(4.8±0.3)d比(6.0±0.3)d,t=0.511,P=0.008]及术后住院时间[(8.1±0.4)d比(10.1±0.3)d,t=0.513,P=0.001]均优于开腹组。(2)肿瘤长径5.1~10.0 cm组:腔镜组术后进食时间[(4.0±0.2)d比(4.7±0.2)d,t=0.506,P=0.015]、引流管拔除时间[(4.6±0.4)d比(6.4±0.5)d,t=0.501,P=0.004]、术后住院时间[(8.2±0.3)d比(10.9±0.6)d,t=0.500,P=0.001]均优于开腹组。两组均无术中及术后并发症。腔镜组和开腹组5年无复发生存率分别为95.4%和91.6%(P=0.734),5年总体生存率分别为93.8%和90.8%(P=0.691),差异均无统计学意义。结论在经验丰富的医疗中心,肿瘤>2 cm胃GIST腹腔镜手术安全、可行,疗效与开腹手术相当。对于非胃大弯侧及胃底体前壁、直径≤5 cm的GIST行腹腔镜手术可加快患者术后康复。 Objective To compare the efficacy between laparoscopy and open surgery for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor(GIST)larger than 2 cm.Methods A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed.Inclusion criteria:long diameter of primary gastric GIST>2 cm;undergoing laparoscopy or open surgery;diagnosis confirmed by postoperative pathology without distant metastasis;without preoperative targeted therapy.Clinicopathological data of 857 gastric GIST patients,including 320 in PLA General Hospital,284 in Shanghai Renji Hospital,175 in Wuhan Union Hospital and 78 in Tianjin Cancer Hospital,from January 2010 to May 2017 were retrospectively collected.There were 418 males and 439 females,mainly aged between 50 and 70 years old.Among 857 patients,413 were in the laparoscopy group and 444 in the open group.The nearest neighbor matching of propensity score matching method was conducted with 1:1 matching based on tumor location and size between laparoscopy and open group to obtain samples of covariate equilibrium,and the caliper value was 0.04.The t test,χ^2 test and Wilcoxon rank test were used to compare short-term efficacy,and the Kaplan-Meier curve and log rank test were applied to compare long-term outcomes between the two groups.Results After propensity score matching,laparoscopy group and open group both enrolled 293 cases.The baseline data,including age,gender,tumor location,tumor long diameter,NIH classification,etc.were not significantly different between the two groups(all P>0.05).Compared with the open group,the laparoscopy group had less intraoperative blood loss[<100 ml:2.9%(155/293)vs.36.2%(106/293),Z=-12.857,P<0.001],shorter time to postoperative feeding[(4.0±0.2)days vs.(5.3±0.9)days,t=1.505,P=0.003]and to the removal of drainage tube[(4.8±1.0)days vs.(6.5±1.0)days,t=1.847,P=0.008],and shorter postoperative hospital stay[(8.6±0.3)days vs.(10.5±0.3)days,t=4.235,P<0.001].Subgroups analysis according to anatomical location:(1)Gastric cardia and pylorus:there were no statistically significant differences in perioperative parameters between the two groups(all P>0.05).(2)Stomach base:feeding time after surgery[(4.0±0.2)days vs.(4.5±0.2)days,t=0.512,P=0.038],drainage tube removal time[(5.1±0.4)days vs.(6.4±0.6)days,t=0.517,P=0.044],postoperative hospital stay[(8.0±0.5)days vs.(11.1±0.9)days,t=0.500,P=0.002]were all significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group as compared to the open group,while the differences in other perioperative parameters were not statistically significant(all P>0.05).(3)Lesser curvature of the stomach:the laparoscopy group had less intraoperative blood loss[<100 ml ratio:58.1%(43/74)vs.33.7%(25/74),Z=7.632,P=0.034],shorter gastric tube removal time[(2.7±0.2)days vs.(3.2±0.3)days,t=0.503,P=0.007],earlier postoperative passage of gas[(2.8±0.1)days vs.(3.4±0.2)days,t=0.532,P=0.030],earlier postoperative feeding[(3.6±0.2)days vs.(4.3±0.2)days,t=0.508,P=0.020],shorter drainage tube removal time[(4.2±0.4)days vs.(5.7±0.5)days,t=0.508,P=0.020]and postoperative hospital stay[(8.3±0.6)days vs.(10.7±0.3)days,t=0.502,P=0.006]as compared to the open group.(4)Great curvature of the stomach:the laparoscopy group presented less intraoperative blood loss[<100 ml ratio:52.7%(39/74)vs.36.5%(27/74),Z=7.681,P=0.032],earlier gastric tube removal[(2.6±0.2)days vs.(3.6±0.2)days,t=0.501,P=0.001],earlier postoperative passage of gas[(2.7±0.2)days vs.(3.4±0.2)days,t=0.501,P=0.016],earlier postoperative feeding[(3.6±0.2)days vs.(4.7±0.2)days,t=0.500,P=0.001],shorter drainage tube removal time[(4.0±0.5)days to(5.9±0.4)days,t=0.508,P=0.002]and postoperative hospital stay[(7.5±0.3)days to(9.5±0.1)days,t=0.500,P=0.001]than the open group.Subgroup analysis according to tumor size:(1)Tumor long diameter 2.0-5.0 cm:the laparoscopy group had earlier passage of gas[(2.9±0.1)days vs.(3.5±0.1)days,t=0.500,P=0.001],earlier postoperative feeding[(4.5±0.1)days vs.(5.0±0.2)days,t=0.501,P=0.013],shorter drainage tube removal time[(4.8±0.3)days vs.(6.0±0.3)days,t=0.511,P=0.008]and postoperative hospital stay[(8.1±0.4)days to(10.1±0.3)days,t=0.513,P=0.001]than the open group.(2)Tumor long diameter 5.1-10.0 cm:in the laparoscopic group,postoperative feeding time[(4.0±0.2)days vs.(4.7±0.2)days,t=0.506,P=0.015],drainage tube removal time[(4.6±0.4)days vs.(6.4±0.5)days,t=0.501,P=0.004],postoperative hospital stay[(8.2±0.3)days vs.(10.9±0.6)days,t=0.500,P=0.001]were all shorter than those in the open group.No intraoperative and postoperative complications were observed in each group.The 5-year recurrence-free survival rates of the laparoscopy group and the open group were 95.4% and 91.6%,respectively(P=0.734),and the 5-year overall survival rates were 93.8% and 90.8%(P=0.691),respectively,and the differences were not statistically significant.Conclusions In experienced medical centers,laparoscopic surgery for gastric GIST larger than 2 cm is safe and feasible,and can achieve comparable efficacy with open surgery.For gastric GISTs which do not locate in the greater curvature and the anterior wall of the stomach,and whose long diameter is≤5 cm,laparoscopic surgery does not increase the risk of recurrence and metastasis,and can accelerate postoperative recovery.
作者 吴欣 孙林德 汪明 张鹏 阳泽龙 梁寒 陶凯雄 曹晖 徐文通 Wu Xin;Sun Linde;Wang Ming;Zhang Peng;Yang Zelong;Liang Han;Tao Kaixiong;Cao Hui;Xu Wentong(Department of General Surgery,First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital,Beijing 100853,China;General Surgery Department of Medicine,Chinese PLA General Hospital,Beijing 100853,China;Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery,Renji Hospital,School of Medicine,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 200127,China;Union Hospital Tongji Medical College Huazhong University of Science and Techinology,Wuhan,Hubei 430022,China;Department of Gastrointestinal Oncological Surgery,Tianjin Cancer Hospital,Tianjin Medical University,Tianjin 300060,China)
出处 《中华胃肠外科杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2020年第9期888-895,共8页 Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
基金 全军十二五课题面上项目(CWS11J103)。
关键词 胃肠间质瘤 腹腔镜手术 开腹手术 倾向性评分匹配 临床疗效 Gastrointestinal stromal tumor Laparoscopic surgery Open surgery Propensity score matching Clinical curative effect
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献90

  • 1Ashwin Rammohan,Jeswanth Sathyanesan,Kamalakannan Rajendran,Anbalagan Pitchaimuthu,Senthil-Kumar Perumal,UP Srinivasan,Ravi Ramasamy,Ravichandran Palaniappan,Manoharan Govindan.A gist of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A review[J].World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology,2013,5(6):102-112. 被引量:28
  • 2贺慧颖,方伟岗,钟镐镐,李燕,郑杰,杜娟,衡万杰,吴秉铨.165例胃肠道间质瘤中c-kit和PDGFRA基因突变的检测和临床诊断意义[J].中华病理学杂志,2006,35(5):262-266. 被引量:73
  • 3詹文华,王鹏志,邵永孚,伍晓汀,顾晋,李荣,万德森,丁克峰,师英强,于吉人,卢辉山,邹小明,毕建威,孙益红,陆云飞,陈道达,张信华.伊马替尼术后辅助治疗胃肠间质瘤的多中心前瞻性临床试验中期报告[J].中华胃肠外科杂志,2006,9(5):383-387. 被引量:85
  • 4Casali PG, Jost L, Reichardt P, et al. Gatrointestinal stromal tumors: EMSO clinical recommendation for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up[J]. Ann Oncol, 2008, 19(Suppl 2) : 35 -38.
  • 5Fletcher CD, Berman JJ, Corless C, et al. Diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A consensus approach[ J ]. Hum Pathol, 2002,33(5) :459 -465.
  • 6Miettinen M, Sobin LH, Lasota J. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the stomach: a clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular genetic study of 1765 cases with long term follow-up[J]. Am J Surg Pathol, 2005,29( 1 ) :52 -68.
  • 7Miettinen M, Lasota J. KIT (CD117) : a review on expression in normal and neoplastic tissues, and mutations and their clinicopathologic correlation [ J ]. Appl hnmunohistochem Mol Morphol, 2005,13 ( 3 ) :205 - 220.
  • 8Corless CL, Fletcher JA, Heinrich MC. Biology of gastrointestinal stromal tumors [ J ]. J Clin Oncol, 2004,22 ( 18 ) : 3813 - 3825.
  • 9Miettinen M, Lasota J. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors : review on morphology, molecular pathology, prognosis, and differential diagnosis[J]. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2006, 130 (10): 1466 - 1478.
  • 10Joensuu H. Risk stratification of patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal stromal tumor [ J ]. Hum Pathol, 2008,39 ( 10 ) : 1411 - 1419.

共引文献383

同被引文献93

引证文献10

二级引证文献18

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