切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2024, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (04) : 205 -209. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6899.2024.04.003

论著

十二指肠残端处理对全腹腔镜胃癌根治术后并发症的影响
胡海涛1, 邵欣欣1, 姜玉娟1, 王鹏1, 李维坤1, 卢一鸣1, 田艳涛1,()   
  1. 1. 100021 北京,国家癌症中心/国家肿瘤临床医学研究中心/中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院胰胃外科
  • 收稿日期:2024-05-05 出版日期:2024-08-30
  • 通信作者: 田艳涛
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金面上项目(8272734); 中国医学科学院肿瘤医院人才激励计划—抗癌之星(801032237)

The impact of duodenal stump management on postoperative complications following totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Haitao Hu1, Xinxin Shao1, Yujuan Jiang1, Peng Wang1, Weikun Li1, Yiming Lu1, Yantao Tian1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Pancreatic and Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
  • Received:2024-05-05 Published:2024-08-30
  • Corresponding author: Yantao Tian
引用本文:

胡海涛, 邵欣欣, 姜玉娟, 王鹏, 李维坤, 卢一鸣, 田艳涛. 十二指肠残端处理对全腹腔镜胃癌根治术后并发症的影响[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 205-209.

Haitao Hu, Xinxin Shao, Yujuan Jiang, Peng Wang, Weikun Li, Yiming Lu, Yantao Tian. The impact of duodenal stump management on postoperative complications following totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 17(04): 205-209.

目的

评估全腹腔镜胃癌手术中十二指肠残端处理对术后并发症的影响。

方法

建立前瞻性观察队列,纳入2021年12月至2022年12月于中国医学科学院肿瘤医院接受全腹腔镜胃癌根治术的患者,使用直线切割闭合器离断十二指肠,并行Billroth Ⅱ式或Roux-en-Y式吻合,十二指肠残端处理采用3-0可吸收倒刺线行连续缝合。主要观察患者术后短期并发症发生情况,分级依据Clavien-Dindo分级标准,并于术后第1、3、5、7天留取流经十二指肠残端的引流液,检测总胆红素和淀粉酶。

结果

本研究共纳入134例患者,其中63例行十二指肠残端加固,71例未行十二指肠残端加固。两组患者在年龄、性别、体质量指数(body mass index,BMI)、美国东部肿瘤协作组(Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, ECOG)评分、营养风险(Nutritional Risk Screening 2002, NRS 2002)评分、内科合并症、术前新辅助治疗及TNM分期上,两者差异均无统计学意义。两组均以Billroth Ⅱ吻合方式为主。在手术时间上,十二指肠残端加固组与未加固组相比差异无统计学意义(160.7±38.2 min vs. 156.3±36.6 min, P=0.649)。两组患者总体并发症发生率及严重并发症发生率差异无统计学意义,但十二指肠残端未加固组出现2例十二指肠残端瘘,而加固组无十二指肠残端瘘发生。在术后引流液总胆红素和淀粉酶指标方面,加固组在术后第1、3、5、7天引流液总胆红素和淀粉酶中位数均低于未加固组,且在术后第1天引流液总胆红素测定中两组间差异有统计学意义。

结论

在全腹腔镜胃癌手术中进行十二指肠残端加固可有效降低十二指肠残端瘘的发生。

Objective

To evaluate the impact of duodenal stump management on postoperative complications in totally laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods

A prospective observational cohort was established, including patients who underwent totally laparoscopic radical gastrectomy at the Cancer Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from Dec. 2021 to Dec. 2022. The duodenum was transected using a linear cutting stapler, followed by Billroth Ⅱ or Roux-en-Y anastomosis. The duodenal stump was managed with continuous suturing using 3-0 absorbable barbed sutures. The primary outcome was the incidence of short-term postoperative complications, graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Additionally, drainage fluid from the duodenal stump was collected on postoperative days 1, 3, 5, and 7 for total bilirubin and amylase testing.

Results

A total of 134 patients were included in the study, with 63 patients undergoing duodenal stump reinforcement and 71 patients not receiving reinforcement. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of age, sex, BMI, ECOG, NRS 2002, medical comorbidities, preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, and TNM stage. Both groups predominantly underwent Billroth Ⅱ anastomosis. There was no significant difference in operative time between the reinforcement group and the non-reinforcement group (160.7±38.2 min vs. 156.3±36.6 min, P=0.649). The overall complication rates and severe complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups, but the non-reinforcement group had two cases of duodenal stump fistula, whereas the reinforcement group had none. The median levels of total bilirubin and amylase in the drainage fluid were lower in the reinforcement group than in the non-reinforcement group on postoperative days 1, 3, 5, and 7, with a significant difference in total bilirubin on the first postoperative day.

Conclusion

Reinforcement of the duodenal stump in total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer can effectively reduce the incidence of duodenal stump leakage.

表1 全腹腔镜胃癌根治术患者十二指肠残端加固组与未加固组基线资料
表2 全腹腔镜胃癌根治术患者十二指肠残端加固组与未加固组术后并发症情况比较
表3 加固组与未加固组术后引流液总胆红素水平比较
表4 加固组与未加固组术后引流液淀粉酶水平比较
1
Zheng RS, Chen R, Han BF, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in China, 2022[J]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi, 2024, 46(3):221-231.
2
Liu F, Huang C, Xu Z, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic vs open total gastrectomy for clinical stage i gastric cancer: the class02 multicenter randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2020, 6(10):1590-1597.
3
Yu J, Huang C, Sun Y, et al. Effect of laparoscopic vs open distal gastrectomy on 3-year disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer: The CLASS-01 randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA, 2019, 321(20):1983-1992.
4
Kim W, Kim HH, Han SU, et al. Decreased morbidity of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy compared with open distal gastrectomy for stage i gastric cancer: short-term outcomes from a multicenter randomized controlled trial (KLASS-01)[J]. Ann Surg, 2016, 263(1):28-35.
5
Wu Q, Wang Y, Peng Q, et al. Safety and effectiveness of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy vs laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: a meta-analysis[J]. Int J Surg, 2024, 110(2):1245-1265.
6
Guo Z, Deng C, Zhang Z, et al. Safety and effectiveness of overlap esophagojejunostomy in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Surg, 2022, 102:106684.
7
Chen Y, Zheng T, Chen Y, et al. Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with Uncut Roux-en-Y for gastric cancer may improve prognosis: a propensity score matching comparative study[J]. Front Oncol, 2022, 12:1086966.
8
单毓强,余盼攀. 腹腔镜胃癌根治术中并发症的预防及处理策略[J/CD]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(2):72-76.
9
Ramos MFKP, Pereira MA, Barchi LC, et al. Duodenal fistula: The most lethal surgical complication in a case series of radical gastrectomy[J]. Int J Surg, 2018, 53:366-370.
10
Orsenigo E, Bissolati M, Socci C, et al. Duodenal stump fistula after gastric surgery for malignancies: a retrospective analysis of risk factors in a single centre experience[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2014, 17(4):733-744.
11
Kim MC, Kim SY, Kim KW. Laparoscopic reinforcement suture (LARS) on staple line of duodenal stump using barbed suture in laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a prospective single arm phase Ⅱ study[J]. J Gastric Cancer, 2017, 17(4):354-362.
12
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey[J]. Ann Surg, 2004, 240(2):205-213.
13
Kostakis ID, Alexandrou A, Armeni E, et al. Comparison between minimally invasive and open gastrectomy for gastric cancer in europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Scand J Surg, 2017, 106(1):3-20.
14
Kim KM, An JY, Kim HI, et al. Major early complications following open, laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy[J]. Br J Surg, 2012, 99(12):1681-1687.
15
Cozzaglio L, Giovenzana M, Biffi R, et al. Surgical management of duodenal stump fistula after elective gastrectomy for malignancy: an Italian retrospective multicenter study[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2016, 19(1):273-279.
16
Gu L, Zhang K, Shen Z, et al. Risk factors for duodenal stump leakage after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. J Gastric Cancer, 2020, 20(1):81-94.
17
Gu L, Zhang K, Shen Z, et al. Risk factors for duodenal stump leakage after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. J Gastric Cancer, 2020, 20(1):81-94.
18
Kim SY, Nam SH, Min JS, et al. Laparoscopic reinforcement suture on staple-line of duodenal stump using barbed suture during laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. Ann Surg Treat Res, 2017, 93(6):305-309.
19
Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after[J]. Surgery, 2017, 161(3):584-591.
20
Schots JPM, Luyer MDP, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP. Abdominal drainage and amylase measurement for detection of leakage after gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2018, 22(7):1163-1170.
21
Paik HJ, Lee SH, Choi CI, et al. Duodenal stump fistula after gastrectomy for gastric cancer: risk factors, prevention, and management[J]. Ann Surg Treat Res, 2016, 90(3):157-163.
22
Po Chu Patricia Y, Ka Fai Kevin W, Fong Yee L, et al. Duodenal stump leakage. Lessons to learn from a large-scale 15-year cohort study[J]. Am J Surg, 2020, 220(4):976-981.
23
戴敏,朱海燕,杨红生,等. 腹腔镜胃癌根治术后胰瘘围手术期预防策略[J/CD]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(4):253-256.
[1] 许杰, 李亚俊, 冯义文. SOX新辅助化疗后腹腔镜胃癌D2根治术与常规根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近期随访比较[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 647-650.
[2] 康婵娟, 张海涛, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入术治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的效果及对患者肝功能、炎症因子水平的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 667-670.
[3] 付成旺, 杨大刚, 王榕, 李福堂. 营养与炎症指标在可切除胰腺癌中的研究进展[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 704-708.
[4] 黄一博, 李至彦, 林晨, 陶亮, 王萌, 管文贤. 胃癌根治术中淋巴结示踪剂的研究进展[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 586-588.
[5] 张钊, 骆成玉, 张树琦, 何平, 李旭斌. 不同术式治疗早期乳腺癌的效果及并发症发生率、复发率比较[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 494-497.
[6] 曾繁利, 齐秩凯, 杨贺庆. 两种经Glisson蒂鞘解剖路径肝切除术治疗原发性肝癌的肿瘤学疗效及风险比对[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 525-527.
[7] 向辉, 贾晓斌, 全卫涛. 真空辅助乳腺微创旋切术治疗乳腺纤维瘤的效果及并发症观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 528-530.
[8] 王维花, 王楠, 乔庆, 罗红. 完全腹腔镜右半结肠癌切除术两种腔内消化道重建方案对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 574-577.
[9] 翟刚, 邓修民, 岑川, 黄锋, 黄显壮, 王运成. 改良双通道吻合法在完全腹腔镜近端胃切除术中的临床效果研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 397-400.
[10] 郭倩, 张晓峰, 张鹏, 苏文博. “四步法”清扫No.253淋巴结在保留LCA的直肠癌根治术中的研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 411-414.
[11] 李澄清, 郭文毅, 王磊. 腹腔镜保留脾脏胰体尾切除术:微创胰腺外科的合理决策[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 620-624.
[12] 罗柳平, 吴萌萌, 陈欣磊, 林科灿. 胰腺全系膜切除在胰头癌根治术中的应用价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 651-656.
[13] 韩青雷, 丛赟, 李佳隆, 邵英梅. 术前减黄方式对壶腹周围癌胰十二指肠切除术后并发症的影响[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 665-669.
[14] 甘曦, 廖鑫. 胃癌旁肿瘤沉积与CT影像学特征、血清指标及病理特征的关联性分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 422-425.
[15] 王璇, 娜扎开提·尼加提, 雒洋洋, 蒋升. 皮肤晚期糖基化终末产物浓度与2型糖尿病微血管并发症的相关性[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 447-454.
阅读次数
全文


摘要