临床研究

经右下腹切口取标本并行预防性造口在腹腔镜下直肠癌低位前切除术中的应用

  • 李星 ,
  • 王有财 ,
  • 徐勇超 ,
  • 唐礼恭 ,
  • 程方圆
展开
  • 郑州大学附属肿瘤医院,河南省肿瘤医院普外科 (河南 郑州 450008 )

收稿日期: 2024-04-19

  网络出版日期: 2024-10-22

基金资助

河南省医学教育研究项目(Wjlx2022037)

Application of prophylactic ileostomy through right lower abdominal specimen extraction incision in laparoscopic rectal low anterior resection

  • Xing LI ,
  • Youcai WANG ,
  • Yongchao XU ,
  • Ligong TANG ,
  • Fangyuan. CHENG
Expand
  • Department of General Surgery,the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & He′nan Cancer Hospital,Zhengzhou 450008,He′nan,ChinaCorresponding auther: XU Yongchao E?mail: xyc19731002@163. com

Received date: 2024-04-19

  Online published: 2024-10-22

摘要

目的 探讨经右下腹切口取标本并行预防性造口在腹腔镜下直肠癌低位前切除术中应用的安全性、临床效果及对术后还纳手术的影响。 方法 回顾性分析2020年1月至2023年12月间我院普外科收治的腹腔镜下直肠癌低位前切除术并行回肠末段造口的127例患者临床资料。根据术中是否经右下腹切口取标本并行造口将患者分为两组:观察组60例经右下腹切口取标本并行预防性造口术,对照组67例经下腹正中切口取标本并另行造口术,比较两组患者的临床相关数据及造口还纳手术相关临床资料。 结果 (1)两组患者的相关基线资料比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05),具有可比性。(2)观察组在手术时间、术后2 d内疼痛评分、术后排气时间方面比较均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。观察组造口切口长度大于对照组,组间比较差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。在术中出血量、术后进食时间以及术后住院时间方面,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。(3)在术后相关并发症及造口相关并发症方面,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。(4)观察组在造口还纳术后疼痛评分及术后排气时间方面均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。在还纳手术时间、腹腔粘连程度、术中出血量、术后住院天数、术后并发症等方面,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。 结论 需行预防性造口的腹腔镜下直肠癌低位前切除术患者,经右下腹切口取标本并行预防性回肠造口可提高患者腹壁切口美观、缩短手术时间、减轻患者痛苦且不增加术后并发症及还纳手术难度,安全可行,值得临床推广。

本文引用格式

李星 , 王有财 , 徐勇超 , 唐礼恭 , 程方圆 . 经右下腹切口取标本并行预防性造口在腹腔镜下直肠癌低位前切除术中的应用[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2024 , 40(19) : 2720 -2725 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2024.19.010

Abstract

Objective To investigate the safety and clinical effect of prophylactic ileostomy using right lower abdominal specimen extraction incision in laparoscopic rectal low anterior resection and its impact on ileostomy closure. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 127 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer combined with prophylactic ileostomy in Department of General Surgery in our hospital from January 2020 to December 2023. Patients were divided into observation group (n = 60) and control group (n = 67) based on whether with prophylactic ileostomy using the right lower abdominal specimen extraction incision or not. Relevant data and clinical data of ileostomy closure were compared between the two groups. Results (1)There was no significant difference in baseline clinical data between the two groups (P > 0.05). (2)In terms of operation time, pain score within three days after surgery and postoperative first exhaust time, the observation group was better than the control group, showing statistical difference (P < 0.05). In the observation group, the average length of the incision was longer than that in the control group, and it was significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of blood loss, postoperative feeding time and postoperative hospital stay (P > 0.05). (3) There was no significant difference between the two groups in postoperative and ostomy-related complication S (P > 0.05). (4) The observation group was better than the control group in terms of postoperative pain score and postoperative first exhaust time, indicating statistical significance (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in surgical time, abdominal adhesion, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion The patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal low anterior resection who needs prophylactic ileostomy using right lower abdominal specimen extraction incision can improve the appearance of the incision, shorten operation time, reduce postoperative pain of the patients but does not increase postoperative complications and the difficulty of ileostomy closure. It is safe and feasible, which worthy for clinical promotion.

参考文献

1 TONINI V, ZANNI M. Impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term prognosis after colorectal cancer surgery[J]. World J Gastrointest Surg, 2023, 15(5):745-756. doi:10.4240/wjgs.v15.i5.745
2 ARRON M N N, GREIJDANUS N G, BASTIAANS S, et al. Long-Term Oncological Outcomes After Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage: A Retrospective Dutch Population-based Study[J]. Ann Surg, 2022, 276(5):882-889. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000005647
3 NIJSSEN D J, WIENHOLTS K, POSTMA M J, et al. The economic impact of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery: A systematic review[J]. Tech Coloproctol, 2024, 28(1):55.
4 KOEDAM T W A, BOOTSMA B T, DEIJEN C L, et al. Oncological Outcomes After Anastomotic Leakage After Surgery for Colon or Rectal Cancer: Increased Risk of Local Recurrence[J]. Ann Surg, 2022, 275(2): e420-e427.
5 PELTRIN R, CARANNANTE F, COSTA G, et al. Oncological outcomes of rectal cancer patients with anastomotic leakage: A multicenter case-control study[J]. Front Surg, 2022, 9:993650.
6 李星, 徐勇超, 王刚成, 等. 腹腔镜下游离带蒂大网膜预防结直肠癌术后高危吻合口漏的疗效[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2021, 37(3): 361-364,368.
7 HUISMAN D E, INGWERSEN E W, REUDINK M, et al. The Selective Use of a Diverting Stoma in Rectal Surgery[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2022, 26(7):1509-1512.
8 YANG S, TANG G, ZHANG Y, et al. Meta-analysis: Loop ileostomy versus colostomy to prevent complications of anterior resection for rectal cancer[J]. Int J Colorectal Dis, 2024, 39(1):68.
9 WANG Z, GUO Y, LI S, et al. What affects the selection of diverting ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery: A single-center retrospective study[J]. BMC Surg, 2024, 24(1):30. doi:10.1186/s12893-024-02316-3
10 CHEN Y, PEI W, WANG Q, et al. One-stitch versus traditional method of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: A retrospective comparative study[J]. Int J Surg, 2020, 80: 117-123.
11 GAO S, GUO X, LI L, et al. Risk factors for periappendiceal adhesions in acute appendicitis: A retrospective comparative study[J]. BMC Surg, 2022, 22(1): 134.
12 吴阿豪, 舒旭峰, 曹毅, 等. 正中标本提取切口与传统右下腹新切口行预防性回肠造口在腹腔镜直肠癌根治术中的安全性比较[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2022, 38(8): 985-990.
13 LIU C, ZHANG J, LI L, et al. Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: A retrospective comparative study[J]. Langenbecks Arch Surg, 2023, 408(1): 151.
14 崔伟, 张玉瑾, 孙亮, 等. 使用下腹部陈旧手术切口做直肠癌标本取出和预防性造口的可行性研究[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2020, 9(4): 387-390.
15 XIANG S, HUANG S, YE H, et al. Feasibility and safety of specimen extraction via an enlarged (U-Plus) skin bridge loop ileostomy: A single-center retrospective comparative study[J]. Front Oncol, 2023, 13:1273499.
16 AMBE P C, KURZ N R, NITSCHKE C, et al. Intestinal Ostomy[J]. Dtsch Arztebl Int, 2018, 115(11): 182-187.
17 杨明, 陈海鹏, 张麟,等. 134例腹部无辅助切口经造口取标本的直肠癌前切除术(造口借道NOSES手术)近期疗效分析[J]. 结直肠肛门外科, 2020, 26(2): 137-142,153.
18 马浚仁, 刘慧慧, 林心怡, 等. 腹腔镜直肠癌低位前切除术经预防造口切口娩出标本的安全性与可行性[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2022, 37(10): 725-729.
19 骆洋, 俞旻皓, 陈建军,等. 脐上纵行辅助切口在腹腔镜直肠癌手术中应用的优势探讨[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2020, 23(3): 289-293.
20 ZHENG B, WANG Q, WEI M, et al. Which site is better for prophylactic ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery? By the specimen extraction site or new site: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Front Oncol, 2023,13:1116502.
文章导航

/