{"title":"腹腔镜根治性右半结肠切除术中的联合方法与传统方法：回顾性分析。","authors":"M Zhang, C Ye, R Huang, Z Zou","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-03026-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic-assisted radical surgery for right hemicolonic cancer with a combined approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective review of clinical data from 102 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer at the Department of General Surgery, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, between January 2021 and September 2023. All patients received preoperative diagnoses of right hemicolonic cancer via CT and e-colonoscopy. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the surgical approach: the combined approach group (n = 51) and the traditional approach group (n = 51). Perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 102 patients were included in the statistical criteria. Comparison of baseline data between the two groups showed no statistically significant differences (all p > 0.05). Compared with the traditional access group, the surgical stem-oriented combined access group had a shorter operative time [(180.69 ± 47.484) min vs. (226.18 ± 45.884) min, t = - 4.920, p < 0.001] and less intraoperative blood loss [(89.71 ± 79.350) ml vs. (149.31 ± 104.633) ml. Z = - 3.370, p = 0.001.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgical stem-oriented modified combined approach laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer is safe and feasible and has the advantages of low surgical difficulty, shortened operative time, reduced intraoperative bleeding, and accelerated postoperative recovery. In addition, the combined approach may be more agreeable for beginners to master, and the procedure may be easier to promote and popularize.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov (2024-KY-026-01).</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combined versus conventional approaches in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy: a retrospective analysis.\",\"authors\":\"M Zhang, C Ye, R Huang, Z Zou\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10151-024-03026-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic-assisted radical surgery for right hemicolonic cancer with a combined approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective review of clinical data from 102 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer at the Department of General Surgery, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, between January 2021 and September 2023. All patients received preoperative diagnoses of right hemicolonic cancer via CT and e-colonoscopy. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the surgical approach: the combined approach group (n = 51) and the traditional approach group (n = 51). Perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 102 patients were included in the statistical criteria. Comparison of baseline data between the two groups showed no statistically significant differences (all p > 0.05). Compared with the traditional access group, the surgical stem-oriented combined access group had a shorter operative time [(180.69 ± 47.484) min vs. (226.18 ± 45.884) min, t = - 4.920, p < 0.001] and less intraoperative blood loss [(89.71 ± 79.350) ml vs. (149.31 ± 104.633) ml. Z = - 3.370, p = 0.001.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgical stem-oriented modified combined approach laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer is safe and feasible and has the advantages of low surgical difficulty, shortened operative time, reduced intraoperative bleeding, and accelerated postoperative recovery. In addition, the combined approach may be more agreeable for beginners to master, and the procedure may be easier to promote and popularize.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov (2024-KY-026-01).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-03026-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-03026-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Combined versus conventional approaches in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy: a retrospective analysis.
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic-assisted radical surgery for right hemicolonic cancer with a combined approach.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of clinical data from 102 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer at the Department of General Surgery, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, between January 2021 and September 2023. All patients received preoperative diagnoses of right hemicolonic cancer via CT and e-colonoscopy. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the surgical approach: the combined approach group (n = 51) and the traditional approach group (n = 51). Perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.
Results: A total of 102 patients were included in the statistical criteria. Comparison of baseline data between the two groups showed no statistically significant differences (all p > 0.05). Compared with the traditional access group, the surgical stem-oriented combined access group had a shorter operative time [(180.69 ± 47.484) min vs. (226.18 ± 45.884) min, t = - 4.920, p < 0.001] and less intraoperative blood loss [(89.71 ± 79.350) ml vs. (149.31 ± 104.633) ml. Z = - 3.370, p = 0.001.
Conclusions: Surgical stem-oriented modified combined approach laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer is safe and feasible and has the advantages of low surgical difficulty, shortened operative time, reduced intraoperative bleeding, and accelerated postoperative recovery. In addition, the combined approach may be more agreeable for beginners to master, and the procedure may be easier to promote and popularize.
期刊介绍：
Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
