{"title":"肝曲或近端横结肠癌症的腹腔镜回盲部保留术与传统右半结肠切除术:一项双中心倾向评分匹配研究。","authors":"Jinjie He, Yue Cao, Xiangxing Kong, Siqi Dai, Jun Li, Dong Xu, Yongmao Song, Jianwei Wang, Lifeng Sun, Zhanhuai Wang, Qian Xiao, Lei Ding, Lihao Chen, Cheng Lei, Jian Wang, Haijiang Wang, Kefeng Ding","doi":"10.1093/gastro/goae047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Traditional right hemicolectomy (TRH) is the standard treatment for patients with nonmetastatic right colon cancer. However, the ileocecum, a vital organ with mechanical and immune functions, is removed in these patients regardless of the tumor location. This study aimed to evaluate the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic ileocecal-sparing right hemicolectomy (LISH).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Patients who underwent LISH at two tertiary medical centers were matched 1:2 with patients who underwent TRH by propensity score matching based on sex, age, body mass index, tumor location, and disease stage. Data on surgical and perioperative outcomes were collected. Oncological safety was evaluated in a specimen-oriented manner. Lymph nodes (LNs) near the ileocolic artery (ICA) were examined independently in the LISH group. Disease outcomes were recorded for patients who completed one year of follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 34 patients in the LISH group and 68 patients in the TRH group were matched. LISH added 8 minutes to the dissection of LNs around the ileocolic vessels (groups 201/201d, 202, and 203 LNs), without affecting the total operation time, blood loss, or perioperative adverse event rate. Compared with TRH, LISH had a comparable lymphadenectomy quality, specimen quality, and safety margin while preserving a more functional bowel. The LISH group had no cases of LN metastasis near the ICA. No difference was detected in the recurrence rate at the 1-year follow-up time point between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this dual-center study, LISH presented comparable surgical and oncological safety for patients with hepatic flexure or proximal transverse colon cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":54275,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Report","volume":"12 ","pages":"goae047"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11105954/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laparoscopic ileocecal-sparing vs traditional right hemicolectomy for cancer of the hepatic flexure or proximal transverse colon: a dual-center propensity score-matched study.\",\"authors\":\"Jinjie He, Yue Cao, Xiangxing Kong, Siqi Dai, Jun Li, Dong Xu, Yongmao Song, Jianwei Wang, Lifeng Sun, Zhanhuai Wang, Qian Xiao, Lei Ding, Lihao Chen, Cheng Lei, Jian Wang, Haijiang Wang, Kefeng Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/gastro/goae047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Traditional right hemicolectomy (TRH) is the standard treatment for patients with nonmetastatic right colon cancer. However, the ileocecum, a vital organ with mechanical and immune functions, is removed in these patients regardless of the tumor location. This study aimed to evaluate the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic ileocecal-sparing right hemicolectomy (LISH).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Patients who underwent LISH at two tertiary medical centers were matched 1:2 with patients who underwent TRH by propensity score matching based on sex, age, body mass index, tumor location, and disease stage. Data on surgical and perioperative outcomes were collected. Oncological safety was evaluated in a specimen-oriented manner. Lymph nodes (LNs) near the ileocolic artery (ICA) were examined independently in the LISH group. Disease outcomes were recorded for patients who completed one year of follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all, 34 patients in the LISH group and 68 patients in the TRH group were matched. LISH added 8 minutes to the dissection of LNs around the ileocolic vessels (groups 201/201d, 202, and 203 LNs), without affecting the total operation time, blood loss, or perioperative adverse event rate. Compared with TRH, LISH had a comparable lymphadenectomy quality, specimen quality, and safety margin while preserving a more functional bowel. The LISH group had no cases of LN metastasis near the ICA. No difference was detected in the recurrence rate at the 1-year follow-up time point between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this dual-center study, LISH presented comparable surgical and oncological safety for patients with hepatic flexure or proximal transverse colon cancer.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastroenterology Report\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"goae047\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11105954/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastroenterology Report\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goae047\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Report","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goae047","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Laparoscopic ileocecal-sparing vs traditional right hemicolectomy for cancer of the hepatic flexure or proximal transverse colon: a dual-center propensity score-matched study.
Background: Traditional right hemicolectomy (TRH) is the standard treatment for patients with nonmetastatic right colon cancer. However, the ileocecum, a vital organ with mechanical and immune functions, is removed in these patients regardless of the tumor location. This study aimed to evaluate the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic ileocecal-sparing right hemicolectomy (LISH).
Method: Patients who underwent LISH at two tertiary medical centers were matched 1:2 with patients who underwent TRH by propensity score matching based on sex, age, body mass index, tumor location, and disease stage. Data on surgical and perioperative outcomes were collected. Oncological safety was evaluated in a specimen-oriented manner. Lymph nodes (LNs) near the ileocolic artery (ICA) were examined independently in the LISH group. Disease outcomes were recorded for patients who completed one year of follow-up.
Results: In all, 34 patients in the LISH group and 68 patients in the TRH group were matched. LISH added 8 minutes to the dissection of LNs around the ileocolic vessels (groups 201/201d, 202, and 203 LNs), without affecting the total operation time, blood loss, or perioperative adverse event rate. Compared with TRH, LISH had a comparable lymphadenectomy quality, specimen quality, and safety margin while preserving a more functional bowel. The LISH group had no cases of LN metastasis near the ICA. No difference was detected in the recurrence rate at the 1-year follow-up time point between the two groups.
Conclusion: In this dual-center study, LISH presented comparable surgical and oncological safety for patients with hepatic flexure or proximal transverse colon cancer.
期刊介绍:
Gastroenterology Report is an international fully open access (OA) online only journal, covering all areas related to gastrointestinal sciences, including studies of the alimentary tract, liver, biliary, pancreas, enteral nutrition and related fields. The journal aims to publish high quality research articles on both basic and clinical gastroenterology, authoritative reviews that bring together new advances in the field, as well as commentaries and highlight pieces that provide expert analysis of topical issues.