Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation in right colon cancer:A comprehensive review

Aim of the study is to comprehensively review the latest trends in laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision(CME) with central vascular ligation(CVL) for the multimodal management of right colon cancer. Historical and up-to-date anatomo-embryological concepts are analyzed in detail,focusing on the latest studies of the mesenteric organ,its dissection by mesofascial and retrofascial cleavage planes,and questioning the need for a new terminology in colonic resections. The rationale behind Laparoscopic CME with CVL is thoroughly investigated and explained. Attention is paid to the current surgical techniques and the quality of the surgical specimen,yielded through mesocolic,intramesocolic and muscularis propria plane of surgery. We evaluate the impact on long term oncologic outcome in terms of local recurrence,overall and disease-free survival,according to the plane of resection achieved. Conclusions are drawn on the basis of the available evidence,which suggests a pivotal role of laparoscopic CME with CVL in the multimodal management of right sided colonic cancer: performed in the right mesocolic plane of resection,laparoscopic CME with CVL demonstrates better oncologic results when compared to standard non-mesocolic planes of surgery,with all the advantages of laparoscopic techniques,both in faster recovery and better immunological response. The importance of minimally invasive mesoresectional surgery is thus stressed and highlighted as the new frontier for a modern laparoscopic total right mesocolectomy.

Expression of cyclin-dependent kinase 9 is positively correlated with the autophagy level in colon cancer

BACKGROUND Cyclin-dependent kinase 9(CDK9)expression and autophagy in colorectal cancer(CRC)tissues has not been widely studied.CDK9,a key regulator of transcription,may influence the occurrence and progression of CRC.The expression of auto-phagy-related genes BECN1 and drug resistance factor ABCG2 may also play a role in CRC.Under normal physiological conditions,autophagy can inhibit tumorigenesis,but once a tumor forms,autophagy may promote tumor growth.Therefore,understanding the relationship between autophagy and cancer,partic-ularly how autophagy promotes tumor growth after its formation,is a key motivation for this research.AIM To investigate the relationship between CDK9 expression and autophagy in CRC,assess differences in autophagy between left and right colon cancer,and analyze the associations of autophagy-related genes with clinical features and prognosis.METHODS We collected tumor tissues and paracarcinoma tissues from colon cancer patients with liver metastasis to observe the level of autophagy in tissues with high levels of CDK9 and low levels of CDK9.We also collected primary tissue from left and right colon cancer patients with liver metastasis to compare the autophagy levels and the expression of BECN1 and ABCG2 in the tumor and paracarcinoma tissues.RESULTS The incidence of autophagy and the expression of BECN1 and ABCG2 were different in left and right colon cancer,and autophagy might be involved in the occurrence of chemotherapy resistance.Further analysis of the rela-tionship between the expression of autophagy-related genes CDK9,ABCG2,and BECN1 and the clinical features and prognosis of colorectal cancer showed that the high expression of CDK9 indicated a poor prognosis in colorectal cancer.CONCLUSION This study laid the foundation for further research on the combination of CDK9 inhibitors and autophagy inhibitors in the treatment of patients with CRC.

Different treatment strategies and molecular features between right-sided and left-sided colon cancers

The colon is derived from the embryological midgut and hindgut separately,with the right colon and left colon having different features with regards to both anatomical and physiological characteristics.Cancers located in the right and left colon are referred to as right colon cancer(RCC) and left colon cancer(LCC),respectively,based on their apparent anatomical positions.Increasing evidence supports the notion that not only are there differences in treatment strategies when dealing with RCC and LCC,but molecular features also vary between them,not to mention the distinguishing clinical manifestations.Disease-free survival after radical surgery of both RCC and LCC are similar.In the treatment of RCC,the benefit gained from adjuvant FOLFIRI chemotherapy is superior,or at least similar,to LCC,but inferior to LCC if FOLFOX regimen is applied.On the other hand,metastatic LCC exhibits longer survival than that of RCC in a palliative chemotherapy setting.For KRAS wild-type cancers,LCC benefits more from cetuximab treatment than RCC.Moreover,advanced LCC shows a higher sensitivity to bevacizumab treatment in comparison with advanced RCC.Significant varieties exist at the molecular level between RCC and LCC,which may serve as the cause of all apparent differences.With respect to carcinogenesis mechanisms,RCC is associated with known gene types,such as MMR,KRAS,BRAF,and mi RNA-31,while LCC is associated with CIN,p53,NRAS,mi RNA-146 a,mi RNA-147 b,and mi RNA-1288.Regarding protein expression,RCC is related to GNAS,NQO1,telomerase activity,P-PDH,and annexin A10,while LCC is related to Topo I,TS,and EGFR.In addition,separated pathways dominate progressionto relapse in RCC and LCC.Therefore,RCC and LCC should be regarded as two heterogeneous entities,with this heterogeneity being used to stratify patients in order for them to have the optimal,current,and novel therapeutic strategies in clinical practice.Additional research is needed to uncover further differences between RCC and LCC.

En bloc pancreaticoduodenectomy and right hemicolectomy for locally advanced right-sided colon cancer

AIM To assess the usefulness of en bloc right hemicolectomy with pancreaticoduodenectomy(RHCPD) for locally advanced right-sided colon cancer(LARCC).METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the database of Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University, between January 2009 and December 2016. During this time, 299 patients underwent radical right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer. Among them, 5 underwent RHCPD for LARCC with tumor infiltration to adjacent organs. Preoperative computed tomography(CT) was routinely performed to evaluate local tumor infiltration into adjacent organs. During the operation, we evaluated the resectability and the amount of infiltration into the adjacent organs without dissecting the adherent organs from the cancer. When we confirmed that radical resection was feasible and could lead to R0 resection, we performed RHCPD. The clinical data were carefully reviewed, and the demographic variables, intraoperative data, and postoperative parameters were recorded.RESULTS The median age of the 5 patients who underwent RHCPD for LARCC was 70 years. The tumors were located in the ascending colon(three patients) and transverse colon(two patients). Preoperative CT revealed infiltration of the tumor into the duodenum in all patients, the pancreas in four patients, the superior mesenteric vein(SMV) in two patients, and tumor thrombosis in the SMV in one patient. We performed RHCPD plus SMV resection in three patients. Major postoperative complications occurred in 3 patients(60%) as pancreatic fistula(grade B and grade C, according to International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula Definition) and delayed gastric empty. None of the patients died during their hospital stay. A histological examination confirmed malignant infiltration into the duodenum and/or pancreas in 4 patients(80%), and no patients showed any malignant infiltration into the SMV. Two patients were histologically confirmed to have tumor thrombosis in the SMV. All of the tumors had clear resection margins(R0). The median follow-up time was 77 mo. During this period, two patients with tumor thrombosis died from liver metastasis. The overall survival rates were 80% at 1 year and 60% at 5 years. All patients with node-negative status(n = 2) survived for more than seven years.CONCLUSION This study showed that the long-term survival is possible for patients with LARCC if RHCPD is performed successfully, particularly in those with node-negative status.

Laparoscopic vs open extended right hemicolectomy for colon cancer

AIM: to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy (LERH) for colon cancer. METHODS: Since its establishment in 2009, the Southern Chinese Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgical Study (SCLCSS) group has been dedicated to promoting patients' quality of life through minimally invasive surgery. The multicenter database was launched by combining existing datasets from members of the SCLCSS group. The study enrolled 220 consecutive patients who were recorded in the multicenter retrospective database and underwent either LERH (n = 119) or open extended right hemicolectomy (OERH) (n = 101) for colon cancer. Clinical characteristics, surgical outcomes, and oncologic outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in terms of age, gender, body mass index (BMI), history of previous abdominal surgery, tumor location, and tumor stage between the two groups. The blood loss was lower in the LERH group than in the OERH group [100 (100-200) mL vs 150 (100-200) mL, P < 0.0001]. The LERH group was associated with earlier first flatus (2.7 +/- 1.0 d vs 3.2 +/- 0.9 d, P < 0.0001) and resumption of liquid diet (3.6 +/- 1.0 d vs 4.2 +/- 1.0 d, P < 0.0001) compared to the OERH group. The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LERH group (11.4 +/- 4.7 d vs 12.8 +/- 5.6 d, P = 0.009) than in the OERH group. The complication rate was 11.8% and 17.6% in the LERH and OERH groups, respectively (P = 0.215). Both 3-year overall survival [LERH (92.0%) vs OERH (84.4%), P = 0.209] and 3-year disease-free survival [LERH (84.6%) vs OERH (76.6%), P = 0.191] were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: LERH with D3 lymphadenectomy for colon cancer is a technically feasible and safe procedure, yielding comparable short-term oncologic outcomes to those of open surgery. (C) 2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

A Comparative Study of the Short-Term Efficacy of Laparoscopic Radical Resection of Right-Sided Colon Cancer with Two Different Surgeon Positions and Trocar Placements

Objective: To investigate the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic radical resection of right-sided colon cancer with two different surgeon positions and trocar placements. Methods: The data of 78 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical resection of right-sided colon cancer between January 2018 and August 2019 were retrospectively analysed. The surgical method was selected by the patients. The patients were divided into two groups according to the surgeons’ positioning habits and trocar placements. The group with the lead surgeon standing between the patient’s legs had 35 patients, and the group with the lead surgeon standing at the left side of the patient had 43 patients. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative anal gas evacuation time, postoperative urinary catheter indwelling time, postoperative hospital stay, C-reactive protein (CRP) level on the first day after surgery, and postoperative pathological data and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: All patients underwent the laparoscopic radical resection of right-sided colon cancer, none converting to laparotomy. No significant difference (P > 0.05) in intraoperative blood loss (57.6 ± 21.3 ml vs 60.2 ± 35.3 ml), postoperative anal gas evacuation time (3.5 ± 1.1 d vs 3.8 ± 1.3 d), postoperative urinary catheter indwelling time (2.6 ± 1.3 d vs 2.4 ± 1.2 d), postoperative hospital stay (7.1 ± 1.8 d vs 7.5 ± 2.1 d), or CRP level on the first day after surgery (54.7 ± 9.6 mg/L vs 53.9 ± 8.2 mg/L) was detected between the two groups. The operation time was shorter in the group with the lead surgeon standing between the patient’s legs (185.2 ± 25.6 min vs 196.2 ±19.7 min) (P < 0.05). The two groups did not differ significantly in the tumour length (4.2 ± 1.3 cm vs 3.9 ± 1.5 cm), number of dissected lymph nodes (27.5 ± 11.6 vs 25.1 ± 15.4), pathological type, or postoperative pathological tumour-node-metastasis stage (P > 0.05). No patients died or had anastomotic fistula during their postoperative hospital stay, and the incidence of postoperative complications did not differ between the two groups (22.9% (8/35) vs 23.3% (10/42);P > 0.05). Conclusion: Under the principle of radical resection, the surgeon should adopt the most suitable standing position and trocar placement according to the specific situation. If the surgeon stands between the patient’s legs, this might shorten the operation time and promote a smoother surgery.

Right and Left Colon Cancer: Clinico-Pathological Features and Treatment Results (South Egypt Cancer Institute Experience)

Background: Colon cancer (CC) ranks as the third most common cancer worldwide and is considered the second leading cause of cancer death. Recently, many international studies have made the observation that right and left colon cancer have many significant differences regarding clinico-pathological characteristics and primary tumor location has a crucial impact on treatment outcomes and overall survival. Our study was conducted to verify the presence of significant differences between right and left colon cancer. Patients and Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort study which aimed at comparing right and left colon cancer as regards clinico-pathological data and treatment results among patients with colon cancer receiving treatment at South Egypt Cancer Institute (SECI) during the period from 1/2008 to 12/2018. A sample size of 160 cases of colon cancer patients (80 diagnosed as right colon cancer and 80 diagnosed as left colon cancer) was randomly selected from our South Egypt Cancer Institute (SECI)’s tumor registry. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS program version 20. Difference was considered statistically significant at P-value < 0.05. Survival curves were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier methods and were compared with the log-rank test. Results: Right colon cancer occurred at an older age and was more commonly presented with abdominal pain while left colon cancer was more commonly presented with bleeding manifestations. More cases of the right side underwent curative surgeries whereas more palliative surgeries were performed to left-sided cases. Left sided cases were associated with a more advanced stage at diagnosis while right-sided cases were associated with a better response to first-line chemotherapy. More cases of the left side died due to metastatic disease. On the other hand, our findings demonstrated no differences between both sides regarding gender predilection, risk factors, sites of metastases, number of metastatic organs, histo-pathological examination and grading, response to second- or third-line chemotherapy, chemotherapy toxicity (hematological or non-hematological), overall survival, progression-free survival, or disease-free survival. Conclusion: Primary tumor location of colon cancer has a significant effect on clinico-pathological characteristics and treatment outcomes.

Comparison of Clinicopathological and Survival Features of Right and Left Colon Cancers: Experience of the Medical Oncology Department of Fez

Right-sided colon cancers (RCC) and left-sided colon cancers (LCC) have different epidemiological, physiological, pathological, genetic, and clinical characteristics, which result in differences in the course, prognosis, and outcome of disease. The objective of our study is to compare right-sided colon cancers and left-sided colon cancers regarding clinicopathological and survival characteristics. This is a retrospective study of 664 patients with colon cancer treated at the medical oncology department of Fez over a period from December 2009 to September 2020. Rectosigmoid, descending colon, and splenic flexure tumors were considered left-sided colon cancers, whereas ascending colon tumors were considered right-sided colon cancers. The Kaplan Meier method was used to estimate median survival. The study included 664 patients (female, 47%) having colon cancer with a median age of 60 years (23 - 83). Of the patients, 78.5% (n = 519) had LCC and 19.36 % (n = 128) had RCC. The rate of patients aged ≥ 65 years and the rate of patients with a family history of colon cancer was higher in the LCC patients. The proportion of poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas represented 3%, of which 63% had cancer of the right colon. There was a significantly higher proportion of higher T stage (T3-4: 62% vs 38%) in right sided tumors as compared to left sided tumors. The rate of metastatic patients was 64.1% in the RCC group and 43% in the LCC group. The median follow-up period was 14 months in the RCC group and 19 months in the LCC group with higher median overall survival in the LCC group (32 vs 21 months). We found histopathological differences between right and left sided colon cancer. Tumors on the right colon were found to be more aggressive, as expressed by poorer differentiation, higher T stage associated with a median overall survival better in left colon cancer.

Comparison of decompression tubes with metallic stents for the management of right-sided malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND Emergency surgical resection is a standard treatment for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction; however, the procedure is associated with high rates of mortality and morbidity. Although a bridge to surgery can be created to obviate the need for emergency surgery, its effects on long-term outcomes and the most practical management strategies for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction remain unclear.AIM To determine the appropriate management approach for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction.METHODS Forty patients with right-sided malignant colonic obstruction who underwent curative resection from January 2007 to April 2017 were included in the study.We compared the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients who received bridges to surgery established using decompression tubes and those created using self-expandable metallic stents(SEMS). The primary outcome was the overall survival duration(OS) and the secondary endpoints were the diseasefree survival(DFS) duration and the preoperative and postoperative morbidity rates. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.RESULTS There were 21 patients in the decompression tube group and 19 in the SEMS group. There were no significant differences in the perioperative morbidity rates of the two groups. The OS rate was significantly higher in the decompression tube group than in the SEMS group(5-year OS rate; decompression tube 79.5%,SEMS 32%, P = 0.043). Multivariate analysis revealed that the bridge to surgery using a decompression tube was significantly associated with the OS(hazard ratio, 17.41; P = 0.004). The 3-year DFS rate was significantly higher in thedecompression tube group than in the SEMS group(68.9% vs 45.9%; log-rank test,P = 0.032). A propensity score–adjusted analysis also demonstrated that the prognosis was significantly better in the decompression tube group than in the SEMS group.CONCLUSION The bridge to surgery using trans-nasal and trans-anal decompression tubes for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction is safe and may improve long-term outcomes.

Patients with Crohn’s disease have longer post-operative in-hospital stay than patients with colon cancer but no difference in complications’ rate

BACKGROUND Right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection are used to treat benign conditions like Crohn’s disease(CD)and malignant ones like colon cancer(CC).AIM To investigate differences in pre-and peri-operative factors and their impact on post-operative outcome in patients with CC and CD.METHODS This is a sub-group analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology’s prospective,multi-centre snapshot audit.Adult patients with CC and CD undergoing right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection were included.Primary outcome measure was 30-d post-operative complications.Secondary outcome measures were post-operative length of stay(LOS)at and readmission.RESULTS Three hundred and seventy-five patients with CD and 2,515 patients with CC were included.Patients with CD were younger(median=37 years for CD and 71 years for CC(P<0.01),had lower American Society of Anesthesiology score(ASA)grade(P<0.01)and less comorbidity(P<0.01),but were more likely to be current smokers(P<0.01).Patients with CD were more frequently operated on by colorectal surgeons(P<0.01)and frequently underwent ileocecal resection(P<0.01)with higher rate of de-functioning/primary stoma construction(P<0.01).Thirty-day post-operative mortality occurred exclusively in the CC group(66/2515,2.3%).In multivariate analyses,the risk of post-operative complications was similar in the two groups(OR 0.80,95%CI:0.54-1.17;P=0.25).Patients with CD had a significantly longer LOS(Geometric mean 0.87,95%CI:0.79-0.95;P<0.01).There was no difference in re-admission rates.The audit did not collect data on post-operative enhanced recovery protocols that are implemented in the different participating centers.CONCLUSION Patients with CD were younger,with lower ASA grade,less comorbidity,operated on by experienced surgeons and underwent less radical resection but had a longer LOS than patients with CC although complications'rate was not different between the two groups.

右半结肠癌根治术患者发生围术期出血的影响因素

目的:分析右半结肠癌根治术患者发生围术期出血的影响因素。方法:选取2021年6月至2023年6月于吉林省肿瘤医院行右半结肠癌根治术的68例患者进行横断面研究,统计右半结肠癌根治术患者围术期出血发生情况,并根据是否发生围术期出血将其分为发生组与未发生组,采用Logistic回归分析右半结肠癌根治术患者发生围术期出血的影响因素。结果:68例右半结肠癌根治术患者中,发生围术期出血20例,发生率为29.41%(20/68);两组性别、年龄、体质量指数、吸烟史、饮酒史、结肠癌家族史、术前血小板计数、临床分期、组织学分型、手术方式、术前凝血酶原时间、术前活化部分凝血活酶时间、术前纤维蛋白原水平比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);发生组合并基础疾病、术前贫血、肿瘤最大直径≥5cm、有吻合口瘘、有术后感染占比高于未发生组,手术时间长于未发生组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);Logistic回归分析结果显示,合并基础疾病、手术时间长、术前贫血、肿瘤最大直径≥5 cm、有吻合口瘘、有术后感染均为右半结肠癌根治术患者发生围术期出血的危险因素(OR>1,P<0.05)。结论:合并基础疾病、手术时间长、术前贫血、肿瘤最大直径≥5cm、有吻合口瘘、有术后感染均为右半结肠癌根治术患者发生围术期出血的危险因素。

全腹腔镜下肠吻合与辅助切口肠吻合在右半结肠癌根治术中的临床疗效对比

目的:对比分析全腹腔镜下肠吻合与辅助切口肠吻合在腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中的临床疗效。方法:回顾分析2017年1月至2022年10月收治的拟手术治疗的右半结肠癌患者的临床资料,根据消化道重建方式分为观察组(全腹腔镜下肠吻合)与对照组(辅助切口肠吻合)。收集两组患者临床资料(年龄、性别、体质指数)、手术时间、术中出血量、手术切口长度、淋巴结清扫数量、术后疼痛评分、术后首次排气时间与排便时间、术后下床活动时间、切口愈合时间、住院时间及术后并发症发生率。结果:共纳入152例患者,其中观察组74例,对照组78例。与对照组相比,观察组术后疼痛评分低,手术切口、术后首次排气时间、术后首次排便时间、术后下床行走时间、切口愈合时间短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组手术时间、淋巴结清扫数量、术中出血量及术后并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:与腹腔镜辅助切口肠吻合术相比,全腹腔镜肠吻合的临床疗效更佳,值得临床推广。

达芬奇机器人辅助右半结肠癌根治术的学习曲线分析

目的:分析达芬奇机器人辅助右半结肠癌根治术的学习曲线。方法:选择2016年3月至2022年6月在郑州大学第一附属医院接受达芬奇机器人辅助右半结肠癌根治术的70例患者。手术由同一组具备丰富结直肠手术经验的团队连续开展。采用累积和分析法拟合该手术的学习曲线。结果:拟合的学习曲线方程为Y=-0.003 X^(3)-0.003 X^(2)+12.849 X-130.951,R^(2)=0.771,P<0.05。第41例时曲线达到峰值,据此将学习曲线分为学习提高与稳定掌握两个阶段。与学习提高阶段相比,稳定掌握阶段手术时间缩短(P=0.005),术中出血量减少(P=0.048),术后并发症减少(P=0.039)。结论:41例为有丰富结直肠手术经验的临床医师稳定掌握达芬奇机器人辅助右半结肠癌根治术所需最小手术例数。

尾侧入路联合中间入路在腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者中的应用效果

目的 探讨尾侧入路联合中间入路在腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者中的应用效果。方法 采用随机数字表法将80例右半结肠癌患者分为对照组和研究组,每组40例,对照组患者采用中间入路腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术,研究组患者采用尾侧入路联合中间入路腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术。比较两组患者的手术相关指标、术后恢复指标和并发症发生情况。结果 研究组患者手术时间明显短于对照组,术中出血量明显少于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.01);两组患者淋巴结清扫数目比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05)。研究组患者术后拔管时间、首次排气时间、首次流质食物进食时间、住院时间均明显短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P﹤0.01)。研究组患者的并发症总发生率为7.50%,与对照组患者的12.50%比较,差异无统计学意义(P﹥0.05)。结论 腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中选取尾侧入路联合中间入路,能够优化手术相关指标,促进术后恢复,且不增加并发症发生风险。

尾侧入路联合中间翻页式清扫在腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中的疗效研究

目的探讨腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中尾侧入路联合中间翻页式清扫的疗效。方法选取2020年1月—2022年10月南通市第二人民医院(南通大学附属康复医院)收治的108例腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术患者为研究对象,按随机数表法分为观察组(n=54,给予尾侧入路联合中间翻页式清扫)、对照组(n=54,给予中间入路)。对比两组手术相关指标、术后恢复时间、术后并发症发生率、为期12个月的随访结局。结果观察组术中操作时间、围手术期失血量、淋巴结清扫数量优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。两组术后初次流食摄入时间、首次肛门排气时间、首次下床活动时间、住院时间,差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。两组并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组无瘤生存率和总生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。结论腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术中尾侧入路联合中间翻页式清扫的预后效果、安全性、术后恢复质量与常规中间入路相当,但相对而言,其存在耗时短、操作便捷、淋巴结清扫数量多、出血少等应用优势。

腹腔镜经肠系膜上动脉优先入路与中间入路右半结肠癌根治术的疗效和安全性比较

目的探讨腹腔镜经肠系膜上动脉优先入路和中间入路治疗右半结肠癌的效果和安全性差异。方法选取丹阳市人民医院于2018年1月—2023年9月收治的60例接受腹腔镜右半结肠癌手术患者为研究对象,按照手术路径分成两组,分别采用中间入路(对照组)和肠系膜上动脉优先入路(研究组),各30例。对比两组术中、术后临床指标、肿瘤标志物水平、炎症因子及并发症发生率。结果研究组术中和术后各指标均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。研究组癌胚抗原、癌抗原-125、恶性肿瘤特异性生长因子、白细胞介素-6、C反应蛋白、白细胞计数水平均低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。术后,研究组并发症总发生率为5.00%低于对照组的26.66%,差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=4.320,P<0.05)。结论肠系膜上动脉优先入路腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术,能改善临床指标、抑制肿瘤标志物,降低炎症因子水平,减少并发症发生情况,增加手术治疗效果。

腹腔镜下右半结肠癌根治术中头侧-中央混合入路的可行性分析

目的分析腹腔镜下右半结肠癌根治术中应用头侧-中央混合入路的可行性。方法选取新乡市第一人民医院于2019年2月至2023年1月择期接受腹腔镜下右半结肠癌根治术的患者180例,按照入路方式分为中央入路组(CW组)及头侧-中央混合入路组(HCMW组),其中CW组85例,HCMW组95例。对比两组术中情况、术后情况、根治术完成质量、并发症发生情况。结果两组中转开腹率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),HCMW组手术时间短于CW组,术时出血量少于CW组,输血率低于CW组(P<0.05)。两组术后情况、根治术质量、手术安全性差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜下右半结肠癌根治术中应用头侧-中央混合入路具有可行性,在保证手术效果的基础上不增加并发症风险,并且能缩短手术时间,减少术时出血量。

腹腔镜右半结肠切除同期行肝方叶转移癌切除1例

目的分析腹腔镜下同期治疗结肠癌及其肝转移的过程,探讨腹腔镜同期手术在治疗结肠癌肝转移中的作用。方法回顾性分析2023年3月安徽医科大学第一附属医院1例结肠癌伴肝方叶转移患者的临床资料,同期行混合入路腹腔镜右半结肠切除、Glisson蒂横断法肝方叶转移癌切除。结果RO切除右半结肠及肝转移癌,术中出血量约50 mL,第4天拔引流管,无并发症,顺利出院。病理结果:结肠溃疡型低分化腺癌,肠周(12/21)个淋巴结有癌转移,低分化肝转移癌。结论腹腔镜同期行右半结肠切除和肝转移癌切除的治疗安全可行,采用新的手术路径和操作模式可保证手术安全,值得推广。

不同入路腹腔镜手术对右半结肠癌患者肠屏障功能和红细胞免疫的影响

目的探讨不同入路腹腔镜手术对右半结肠癌患者肠屏障功能、红细胞免疫及预后的影响。方法选取2019年4月至2021年4月我院收治的110例右半结肠癌患者,简单随机化法分为A组(n=55)和B组(n=55),治疗期间,A组失访2例,B组失访3例,最终A组和B组分别纳入53例和52例。2组均行腹腔镜手术,A组采取头侧入路,B组采取中间入路。统计2组围手术期指标、并发症、预后及手术前后肠屏障功能(内毒素、D-乳酸、二胺氧化酶)、红细胞免疫[红细胞免疫复合物花环率(RBC-ICR)、红细胞C3b受体花环率(RBC-C3bRR)、红细胞黏附肿瘤细胞花环率(TRR)]。结果与B组相比,A组术中出血量较少,中央淋巴结清扫时间、手术时间较短,并发症发生率较低(P<0.05);术后3 d 2组内毒素、二胺氧化酶、D-乳酸水平均高于术前(P<0.05);术后3 d 2组RBC-ICR高于术前,TRR、RBC-C3bRR低于术前(P<0.05);术后1年随访,2组远处转移、局部复发、生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论2种入路方案在右半结肠癌中效果相当,其中头侧入路腹腔镜手术可缩短手术时间,降低并发症发生率。

头侧入路与中间入路在改良腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌D3根治术中的应用效果比较

目的比较头侧入路与中间入路在改良腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌D3根治术中的应用效果。方法选取2019年6月至2022年6月收治的100例行改良腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌D3根治术患者为研究对象,根据入路方式不同将其分为A组和B组,各50例。A组采用头侧入路,B组采用中间入路。比较两组的治疗效果。结果A组的中央淋巴结清扫时间、总手术时间短于B组,术中失血量少于B组,血管损伤发生率低于B组(P<0.05)。术后1 d,两组的醛固酮(ALD)、皮质醇(Cor)、促肾上腺皮质激素(ACTH)水平明显升高,但A组低于B组(P<0.05)。术后7 d,两组的Polo样激酶1(PLk1)、胸苷激酶1(TK1)、Livin水平均降低,且A组低于B组(P<0.05)。结论头侧入路与中间入路在改良腹腔镜辅助右半结肠癌D3根治术中均能取得较好的效果,但头侧入路有助于缩短手术时间,减少失血量,降低血管损伤发生率,减轻机体应激反应,也能下调癌活力,值得推广。