乙状结肠腹膜外造口联合盆腔腹膜闭合在腹会阴低位直肠癌切除术后肠梗阻的发生率。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Techniques in Coloproctology Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI:10.1007/s10151-024-03057-4
Y Li, S Hong, Y Lv, D Hou, H Liu
{"title":"乙状结肠腹膜外造口联合盆腔腹膜闭合在腹会阴低位直肠癌切除术后肠梗阻的发生率。","authors":"Y Li, S Hong, Y Lv, D Hou, H Liu","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-03057-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the efficacy of laparoscopic sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 162 patients with low rectal cancer, who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection from January 2015 to January 2019 at the Affiliated Peace Hospital of Changzhi Medical College. Extraperitoneal stoma construction was performed in 98 patients (study group), while 64 patients (control group) underwent the procedure without suturing the pelvic peritoneum. All patients were followed up for 24 months postoperatively. The outcome measures were intra- and postoperative conditions and short- and long-term postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The patients in both groups successfully underwent laparoscopic surgery, and no conversion to laparotomy was required. The operation time (165.93 ± 24.91 vs 159.75 ± 21.60), intraoperative blood loss (120.71 ± 49.16 vs 120.63 ± 45.63), flatus elimination time (55.14 ± 10.67 vs 53.1 ± 10.53), and degree of cancer differentiation did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the pelvic peritoneal closure time (10.16 ± 1.98 vs 0.00), ostomy time (24.17 ± 2.26 vs 20.61 ± 2.0), and postoperative hospital stay duration (14.43 ± 2.49 vs 16.19 ± 3.50) showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). A comparison of the incidence of short-term complications between the two groups showed that intestinal obstruction occurred in three patients in the study group and eight patients in the control group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05); however, the incidence of other complications did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). Moreover, comparing the long-term complications revealed no significant differences in the incidence of intestinal obstruction and perineal hernia between the two groups (P > 0.05). Long-term complications were reported in two patients in the study group (extraperitoneal stoma approach) and nine patients in the control group (intraperitoneal stoma approach), with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer is safe and feasible. This approach can effectively reduce the postoperative incidence of intestinal obstruction, hospital stay duration, and stomal complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incidence of intestinal obstruction after sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Y Li, S Hong, Y Lv, D Hou, H Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10151-024-03057-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the efficacy of laparoscopic sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 162 patients with low rectal cancer, who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection from January 2015 to January 2019 at the Affiliated Peace Hospital of Changzhi Medical College. Extraperitoneal stoma construction was performed in 98 patients (study group), while 64 patients (control group) underwent the procedure without suturing the pelvic peritoneum. All patients were followed up for 24 months postoperatively. The outcome measures were intra- and postoperative conditions and short- and long-term postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The patients in both groups successfully underwent laparoscopic surgery, and no conversion to laparotomy was required. The operation time (165.93 ± 24.91 vs 159.75 ± 21.60), intraoperative blood loss (120.71 ± 49.16 vs 120.63 ± 45.63), flatus elimination time (55.14 ± 10.67 vs 53.1 ± 10.53), and degree of cancer differentiation did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the pelvic peritoneal closure time (10.16 ± 1.98 vs 0.00), ostomy time (24.17 ± 2.26 vs 20.61 ± 2.0), and postoperative hospital stay duration (14.43 ± 2.49 vs 16.19 ± 3.50) showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). A comparison of the incidence of short-term complications between the two groups showed that intestinal obstruction occurred in three patients in the study group and eight patients in the control group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05); however, the incidence of other complications did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). Moreover, comparing the long-term complications revealed no significant differences in the incidence of intestinal obstruction and perineal hernia between the two groups (P > 0.05). Long-term complications were reported in two patients in the study group (extraperitoneal stoma approach) and nine patients in the control group (intraperitoneal stoma approach), with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer is safe and feasible. This approach can effectively reduce the postoperative incidence of intestinal obstruction, hospital stay duration, and stomal complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"48\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-20\",\"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/s10151-024-03057-4\",\"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/s10151-024-03057-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨腹腔镜乙状结肠腹腔外造口联合盆腔腹膜闭合在低位直肠癌腹会阴切除术中的应用效果。方法:回顾性分析2015年1月至2019年1月在长治医学院附属和平医院行腹腔镜腹会阴切除术的低位直肠癌患者162例的临床资料。98例患者(研究组)行腹腔外造口术,64例患者(对照组)不缝合盆腔腹膜。术后随访24个月。结果测量为手术内和术后情况以及术后短期和长期并发症。结果:两组患者均顺利完成腹腔镜手术,无需转开腹手术。两组手术时间(165.93±24.91 vs 159.75±21.60)、术中出血量(120.71±49.16 vs 120.63±45.63)、排气量(55.14±10.67 vs 53.1±10.53)、肿瘤分化程度差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。盆腔腹膜闭合时间(10.16±1.98 vs 0.00)、造口时间(24.17±2.26 vs 20.61±2.0)、术后住院时间(14.43±2.49 vs 16.19±3.50)差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。此外,比较长期并发症,两组间肠梗阻和会阴疝发生率无显著差异(P < 0.05)。研究组(腹膜外造口入路)2例,对照组(腹膜内造口入路)9例出现长期并发症,差异有统计学意义(P)。结论:乙状结肠腹膜外造口联合盆腔腹膜闭合在低位直肠癌腹会阴切除术中是安全可行的。该方法可有效减少术后肠梗阻的发生率、住院时间和造口并发症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Incidence of intestinal obstruction after sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of laparoscopic sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 162 patients with low rectal cancer, who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection from January 2015 to January 2019 at the Affiliated Peace Hospital of Changzhi Medical College. Extraperitoneal stoma construction was performed in 98 patients (study group), while 64 patients (control group) underwent the procedure without suturing the pelvic peritoneum. All patients were followed up for 24 months postoperatively. The outcome measures were intra- and postoperative conditions and short- and long-term postoperative complications.

Results: The patients in both groups successfully underwent laparoscopic surgery, and no conversion to laparotomy was required. The operation time (165.93 ± 24.91 vs 159.75 ± 21.60), intraoperative blood loss (120.71 ± 49.16 vs 120.63 ± 45.63), flatus elimination time (55.14 ± 10.67 vs 53.1 ± 10.53), and degree of cancer differentiation did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the pelvic peritoneal closure time (10.16 ± 1.98 vs 0.00), ostomy time (24.17 ± 2.26 vs 20.61 ± 2.0), and postoperative hospital stay duration (14.43 ± 2.49 vs 16.19 ± 3.50) showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). A comparison of the incidence of short-term complications between the two groups showed that intestinal obstruction occurred in three patients in the study group and eight patients in the control group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05); however, the incidence of other complications did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). Moreover, comparing the long-term complications revealed no significant differences in the incidence of intestinal obstruction and perineal hernia between the two groups (P > 0.05). Long-term complications were reported in two patients in the study group (extraperitoneal stoma approach) and nine patients in the control group (intraperitoneal stoma approach), with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer is safe and feasible. This approach can effectively reduce the postoperative incidence of intestinal obstruction, hospital stay duration, and stomal complications.

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
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
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.
期刊最新文献
Comparing answers of ChatGPT and Google Gemini to common questions on benign anal conditions. Robotic-assisted total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in familial adenomatous polyposis: a step-by-step approach for surgeons advancing to expertise. Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) in the treatment of rectal cancer: current practice and evolving approaches in India. Margin matters: analyzing the impact of circumferential margin involvement on survival and recurrence after incomplete total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Positive lateral lymph node turned negative after neoadjuvant therapy-surgery or observation?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1