结肠癌切除术中腹腔镜完整系膜切除术与 D2 根治术的比较:倾向评分匹配分析

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Zhen Han, Yangan Liu, Ming Tan, Zhaolai Hua, Chun Dai
{"title":"结肠癌切除术中腹腔镜完整系膜切除术与 D2 根治术的比较:倾向评分匹配分析","authors":"Zhen Han, Yangan Liu, Ming Tan, Zhaolai Hua, Chun Dai","doi":"10.3233/THC-241149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgery remains the most effective treatment for colon cancer. However, there are still controversies regarding the tumor treatment effect, prognosis, and perioperative impact of complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery in colon carcinoma resection.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (LCME) and traditional open D2 radical surgery in colon carcinoma resection through a retrospective analysis using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>98 cases undergoing LCME or open D2 colon carcinoma resection at our hospital from January 2014 to November 2021 were retrospectively collected. After excluding cases and 1:1 matching using PSM based on baseline clinical data, 86 patients were assigned in research queue. 43 patients were in each group. Two groups were compared for general clinical baseline indicators. Surgical results and postoperative adverse events of patients were also compared. Disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After 1:1 PSM matching, there was no statistically significant differences in baseline data between the LCME group and D2 group (P> 0.05). LCME was characterized by longer total duration of surgery (P< 0.001), less intraoperative bleeding volume (P< 0.001), more postoperative drainage fluid volume (P< 0.001), greater number of lymph nodes retrieved (P= 0.014). No statistically differences was observed regarding intraoperative blood transfusion, hospital stay, Clavien-Dindo complicating disease classification (all P> 0.05), 1 and 3-year DFS rate (P= 0.84) and OS rate (P⩾ 0.1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LCME had a longer duration of surgery but less intraoperative bleeding volume and more postoperative drainage fluid volume and retrieved lymph nodes compared to D2 radical surgery. LCME surgery is comparable to D2 surgery in terms of postoperative prognosis, but LCME surgery shows a positive trend in the overall survival curve.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision and D2 radical operation in colon carcinoma resection: A propensity score matching analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Zhen Han, Yangan Liu, Ming Tan, Zhaolai Hua, Chun Dai\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/THC-241149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgery remains the most effective treatment for colon cancer. However, there are still controversies regarding the tumor treatment effect, prognosis, and perioperative impact of complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery in colon carcinoma resection.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (LCME) and traditional open D2 radical surgery in colon carcinoma resection through a retrospective analysis using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>98 cases undergoing LCME or open D2 colon carcinoma resection at our hospital from January 2014 to November 2021 were retrospectively collected. After excluding cases and 1:1 matching using PSM based on baseline clinical data, 86 patients were assigned in research queue. 43 patients were in each group. Two groups were compared for general clinical baseline indicators. Surgical results and postoperative adverse events of patients were also compared. Disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After 1:1 PSM matching, there was no statistically significant differences in baseline data between the LCME group and D2 group (P> 0.05). LCME was characterized by longer total duration of surgery (P< 0.001), less intraoperative bleeding volume (P< 0.001), more postoperative drainage fluid volume (P< 0.001), greater number of lymph nodes retrieved (P= 0.014). No statistically differences was observed regarding intraoperative blood transfusion, hospital stay, Clavien-Dindo complicating disease classification (all P> 0.05), 1 and 3-year DFS rate (P= 0.84) and OS rate (P⩾ 0.1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LCME had a longer duration of surgery but less intraoperative bleeding volume and more postoperative drainage fluid volume and retrieved lymph nodes compared to D2 radical surgery. LCME surgery is comparable to D2 surgery in terms of postoperative prognosis, but LCME surgery shows a positive trend in the overall survival curve.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-241149\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-241149","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:手术仍是结肠癌最有效的治疗方法。然而,对于结肠癌切除术中完全结肠系膜切除术(CME)的肿瘤治疗效果、预后和围手术期的影响仍存在争议:方法:回顾性收集2014年1月至2021年11月在我院接受腹腔镜完整结肠系膜切除术(LCME)和传统开腹D2根治术的98例病例。根据基线临床数据排除病例并使用倾向得分匹配法进行1:1匹配后,86名患者被分配到研究队列中。每组 43 人。两组患者的一般临床基线指标进行比较。两组患者的手术效果和术后不良反应也进行了比较。分析无病生存率(DFS)和总生存率(OS):经过 1:1 PSM 匹配后,LCME 组与 D2 组的基线数据差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。LCME 组的特点是手术总时间长(P< 0.001)、术中出血量少(P< 0.001)、术后引流液量多(P< 0.001)、取淋巴结数量多(P= 0.014)。在术中输血、住院时间、Clavien-Dindo并发症分类(均P> 0.05)、1年和3年DFS率(P= 0.84)和OS率(P⩾ 0.1)方面未观察到统计学差异:结论:与D2根治术相比,LCME手术时间更长,但术中出血量更少,术后引流液量更多,取回的淋巴结也更多。就术后预后而言,LCME手术与D2手术相当,但LCME手术的总生存曲线呈正向趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison between laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision and D2 radical operation in colon carcinoma resection: A propensity score matching analysis.

Background: Surgery remains the most effective treatment for colon cancer. However, there are still controversies regarding the tumor treatment effect, prognosis, and perioperative impact of complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery in colon carcinoma resection.

Objective: This study aims to compare laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (LCME) and traditional open D2 radical surgery in colon carcinoma resection through a retrospective analysis using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).

Methods: 98 cases undergoing LCME or open D2 colon carcinoma resection at our hospital from January 2014 to November 2021 were retrospectively collected. After excluding cases and 1:1 matching using PSM based on baseline clinical data, 86 patients were assigned in research queue. 43 patients were in each group. Two groups were compared for general clinical baseline indicators. Surgical results and postoperative adverse events of patients were also compared. Disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate was analyzed.

Results: After 1:1 PSM matching, there was no statistically significant differences in baseline data between the LCME group and D2 group (P> 0.05). LCME was characterized by longer total duration of surgery (P< 0.001), less intraoperative bleeding volume (P< 0.001), more postoperative drainage fluid volume (P< 0.001), greater number of lymph nodes retrieved (P= 0.014). No statistically differences was observed regarding intraoperative blood transfusion, hospital stay, Clavien-Dindo complicating disease classification (all P> 0.05), 1 and 3-year DFS rate (P= 0.84) and OS rate (P⩾ 0.1).

Conclusion: LCME had a longer duration of surgery but less intraoperative bleeding volume and more postoperative drainage fluid volume and retrieved lymph nodes compared to D2 radical surgery. LCME surgery is comparable to D2 surgery in terms of postoperative prognosis, but LCME surgery shows a positive trend in the overall survival curve.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信