Lan Hong, Xiuzhen Wang, Shengtan Wang, Wei Li, Lang Zheng, Jun Liu, Haocheng Gao, Xiaohang Liu, Guifei Li, Lifan Shen, Hengzhi Zhuang, Genhai Zhu
{"title":"腹腔镜和开腹手术治疗子宫内膜样腺癌:短期和长期疗效比较","authors":"Lan Hong, Xiuzhen Wang, Shengtan Wang, Wei Li, Lang Zheng, Jun Liu, Haocheng Gao, Xiaohang Liu, Guifei Li, Lifan Shen, Hengzhi Zhuang, Genhai Zhu","doi":"10.1155/2024/9013582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Aims</i>. To analyze the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treatment of endometrioid adenocarcinoma and examine the benefits of laparoscopy. <i>Methods</i>. From January 2012 to July 2020, 693 endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients undergoing laparoscopy versus laparotomy were retrospectively identified and enrolled in this study. Basic information for the patients, their perioperative indexes, and recurrence rates were reviewed to assess the therapeutic effect of these two approaches for endometrioid adenocarcinoma. <i>Results</i>. A total of 365 endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients underwent laparoscopy, and 328 patients underwent laparotomy. When compared with the laparotomic group, the laparoscopic group had longer operative times, lower intraoperative bleeding volumes, and shorter postoperative hospital stays. The rate of less-radical hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy performed in the laparoscopic group (59/365, 16.16%) was significantly lower than that in the laparotomic group (162/328, 49.39%). There was no statistically significant difference in the local recurrence rate between the two groups; however, the remote recurrence rate in the laparotomic group (15/308, 4.87%) was significantly higher than that in the laparoscopic group (3/351, 0.85%). A further subgroup analysis revealed a higher survival benefit both in I/II patients (314/314, 100%, vs. 7/242, 28.93%) and III/IV patients (35/37, 94.59%, vs. 51/66, 77.27%) in the laparoscopic group, when compared with the laparotomic group. <i>Conclusion</i>. Patients who received laparoscopic surgery had a faster surgical recovery and a lower postoperative recurrence rate in the short term than patients who received laparotomic surgery. Laparoscopic surgery is a safe and effective treatment for endometrioid adenocarcinoma.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13782,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/9013582","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laparoscopy and Laparotomy for Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes’ Comparison\",\"authors\":\"Lan Hong, Xiuzhen Wang, Shengtan Wang, Wei Li, Lang Zheng, Jun Liu, Haocheng Gao, Xiaohang Liu, Guifei Li, Lifan Shen, Hengzhi Zhuang, Genhai Zhu\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/9013582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n <p><i>Aims</i>. To analyze the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treatment of endometrioid adenocarcinoma and examine the benefits of laparoscopy. <i>Methods</i>. From January 2012 to July 2020, 693 endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients undergoing laparoscopy versus laparotomy were retrospectively identified and enrolled in this study. Basic information for the patients, their perioperative indexes, and recurrence rates were reviewed to assess the therapeutic effect of these two approaches for endometrioid adenocarcinoma. <i>Results</i>. A total of 365 endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients underwent laparoscopy, and 328 patients underwent laparotomy. When compared with the laparotomic group, the laparoscopic group had longer operative times, lower intraoperative bleeding volumes, and shorter postoperative hospital stays. The rate of less-radical hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy performed in the laparoscopic group (59/365, 16.16%) was significantly lower than that in the laparotomic group (162/328, 49.39%). There was no statistically significant difference in the local recurrence rate between the two groups; however, the remote recurrence rate in the laparotomic group (15/308, 4.87%) was significantly higher than that in the laparoscopic group (3/351, 0.85%). A further subgroup analysis revealed a higher survival benefit both in I/II patients (314/314, 100%, vs. 7/242, 28.93%) and III/IV patients (35/37, 94.59%, vs. 51/66, 77.27%) in the laparoscopic group, when compared with the laparotomic group. <i>Conclusion</i>. Patients who received laparoscopic surgery had a faster surgical recovery and a lower postoperative recurrence rate in the short term than patients who received laparotomic surgery. Laparoscopic surgery is a safe and effective treatment for endometrioid adenocarcinoma.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\"2024 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/9013582\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/9013582\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/9013582","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Laparoscopy and Laparotomy for Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes’ Comparison
Aims. To analyze the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treatment of endometrioid adenocarcinoma and examine the benefits of laparoscopy. Methods. From January 2012 to July 2020, 693 endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients undergoing laparoscopy versus laparotomy were retrospectively identified and enrolled in this study. Basic information for the patients, their perioperative indexes, and recurrence rates were reviewed to assess the therapeutic effect of these two approaches for endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Results. A total of 365 endometrioid adenocarcinoma patients underwent laparoscopy, and 328 patients underwent laparotomy. When compared with the laparotomic group, the laparoscopic group had longer operative times, lower intraoperative bleeding volumes, and shorter postoperative hospital stays. The rate of less-radical hysterectomy and radical hysterectomy performed in the laparoscopic group (59/365, 16.16%) was significantly lower than that in the laparotomic group (162/328, 49.39%). There was no statistically significant difference in the local recurrence rate between the two groups; however, the remote recurrence rate in the laparotomic group (15/308, 4.87%) was significantly higher than that in the laparoscopic group (3/351, 0.85%). A further subgroup analysis revealed a higher survival benefit both in I/II patients (314/314, 100%, vs. 7/242, 28.93%) and III/IV patients (35/37, 94.59%, vs. 51/66, 77.27%) in the laparoscopic group, when compared with the laparotomic group. Conclusion. Patients who received laparoscopic surgery had a faster surgical recovery and a lower postoperative recurrence rate in the short term than patients who received laparotomic surgery. Laparoscopic surgery is a safe and effective treatment for endometrioid adenocarcinoma.
期刊介绍:
IJCP is a general medical journal. IJCP gives special priority to work that has international appeal.
IJCP publishes:
Editorials. IJCP Editorials are commissioned. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
Perspectives. Most IJCP Perspectives are commissioned. Example. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
Study design and interpretation. Example. [Always peer reviewed]
Original data from clinical investigations. In particular: Primary research papers from RCTs, observational studies, epidemiological studies; pre-specified sub-analyses; pooled analyses. [Always peer reviewed]
Meta-analyses. [Always peer reviewed]
Systematic reviews. From October 2009, special priority will be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed]
Non-systematic/narrative reviews. From October 2009, reviews that are not systematic will be considered only if they include a discrete Methods section that must explicitly describe the authors'' approach. Special priority will, however, be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed]
''How to…'' papers. Example. [Always peer reviewed]
Consensus statements. [Always peer reviewed] Short reports. [Always peer reviewed]
Letters. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
International scope
IJCP publishes work from investigators globally. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the UK. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the USA or Canada. Around 45% of IJCP articles list an author from a European country that is not the UK. Around 15% of articles published in IJCP list an author from a country in the Asia-Pacific region.