目的:探讨不同手术入路在贲门癌治疗中的临床应用。方法:回顾性分析我院2003年8月至2009年1月期间收治的153例贲门癌患者的临床资料,根据不同手术入路分为经腹组(n=74)、胸腹联合组(n=27)和经胸组(n=52),对3组患者的手术中、术后恢复情况以及随访结果进行对比分析。结果:手术切除率100%,围手术期无死亡病例。经腹组手术时间短于经胸组和胸腹联合组,术中出血量也少于经胸组和胸腹联合组,但差异无统计学意义(Pgt;0.05)。胸腹联合组和经腹组清扫的淋巴结数目明显多于经胸组,差异有统计学意义(Plt;0.05)。经腹组患者术后住院时间和术后并发症发生率明显少于胸腹联合组和经胸组,差异有统计学意义(Plt;0.05)。3组患者的术后局部复发率和远处转移率的差异均无统计学意义(Pgt;0.05),3年和5年生存率的差异也无统计学意义(Pgt;0.05)。结论:经腹贲门癌切除术是安全和有效的,配合吻合器的使用,操作也是可行的。
目的 探讨腹部刀刺伤诊治策略，提高治疗水平。方法 回顾性总结分析147例腹部刀刺伤的诊断和治疗。结果 剖腹手术139例，伤口清创缝合8例，治愈145例，死亡2例。结论 休克，大网膜及腹腔脏器外脱，腹痛伴腹膜炎体征，诊断性腹腔穿刺阳性均是手术指征。臀部刀刺伤要警惕损伤腹腔脏器。合并胸部伤或发生胸腹联合伤时，除有心脏大血管损伤外，原则上应先剖腹，术前置胸腔引流观察胸腔出血漏气情况，改善呼吸。
Objective The efficacy and morbidity of thoracoabdominal incision in comparison with flank incision for radical nephrectomy are unknown. This retrospective study was performed to compare the outcome of thoracoabdominal incision versus flank incision for radical nephrectomy in patients with large renal tumors. Methods A questionnaire assessing the time of postoperative pain, use of anodyne and return to daily activities and work was sent to patients who underwent radical nephrectomy through the 11th rib (flank incision, group A, 96 patients) or the 9th to 10th rib (thoracoabdominal incision, group B, 98 patients) from 2003 to 2008 at the Second Xiangya Hospital in Changsha, China. A case retrospective analysis assessing operation time, perioperative hemorrhage volume, size of tumors, success in the treatment of tumor thrombus in renal vein or vena cava, presence of drainage-tube, postoperative analgesia usage and length of stay was done for patients whose questionnaires were returned. Results The length of operation time and the presence of abdominal drainage-tube was shorter in the thoracoabdominal incision group (group B) than in the flank incision group (group A). The perioperative hemorrhage volume in group B was less than that in group A. The mean size of tumors in group A was smaller than that in group B (Plt;0.000 5). The success rate in the treatment of thrombus in renal vein or vena cava in group B was higher than that in group A (Plt;0.05). The length of off-bed time and of hospital stay were similar in both groups. There were no significant differences between the groups in pain severity postoperative day 1, on the day of discharge and 1 month postoperatively (Pgt;0.05). There were no significant differences between the groups in the time from surgery to the complete disappearence of pain, to the discontinuation of pain medication, and to the return to daily activities and work (Pgt;0.05). Conclusion The approach of thoracoabdominal incision provides better exposure. Morbidity is comparable for thoracoabdominal and flank incisions in terms of incisional pain, analgesic requirements after discharge and return to normal activities.
目的 探讨腹部刀刺伤的诊断与治疗。方法 回顾性总结分析147例腹部刀刺伤患者的临床资料。结果1 47例患者中，腹腔脏器从伤口脱出43例，其中大网膜脱出39例，小肠脱出1例，胃脱出1例，结肠脱出2例。伴失血性休克28例。全组病例中行剖腹探查手术139例，伤口清创缝合8例； 治愈145例，死亡2例。结论 腹部刀刺伤合并休克，有大网膜及腹腔脏器外脱，腹痛伴腹膜炎体征，诊断性腹腔穿刺阳性均是手术指征。臀部刀刺伤要警惕损伤腹腔脏器。合并胸部伤或发生胸腹联合伤时，除有心脏大血管损伤外，原则上应先剖腹，术前置胸腔引流观察胸腔出血、漏气情况，改善呼吸。
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy of different surgical approaches for Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG). MethodsThe clinical data of the patients with Siewert type Ⅱ AEG who received sugeries in the Department of Thoracic Surgery of Gansu Provincial People's Hospital from August 2014 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical approach: a transabdominal group (transabdominal diaphragmatic esophageal hiatus approach) and a combined group (thoracoabdominal combined with right thoracic approach). Perioperative clinical data and postoperative follow-up data were collected to compare the short- and long-term efficacy of the two groups. Results A total of 87 patients were enrolled. There were 48 patients (31 males and 17 females, with an average age of 60.85±8.47 years) in the transabdominal group, and 39 patients (25 males and 14 females, with an average age of 61.13±8.51 years) in the combined group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the baseline indicators such as gender, age, tumor size and stage (P>0.05). Compared with the combined group, the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative bed rest time, postoperative total drainage volume were shorter or less, and the visual analogue scale score on the 3rd day after surgery were lower in the transabdominal group (P<0.05). However, the total number of lymph nodes dissected, the number of thoracic lymph nodes dissected and the number of positive thoracic lymph nodes in the combined group were larger than those in the transabdominal group, and the differences were statistically significant (P=0.001). The median survival time in the combined group and transabdominal group was 25.85 months and 20.86 months, respectively. The 3-year overall survival rate of the combined group was higher than that of the transabdominal group (46.2% vs. 38.9%, χ2=5.995, P=0.014). However, there was no statistical difference between the two groups in the postoperative catheter time, esophageal and gastric resection margin distance, number of abdominal lymph nodes dissected, number of positive abdominal lymph nodes, or incidence of postoperative complications (P>0.05). ConclusionFor patients with Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction, thoracoabdominal combined with right thoracic approach is safe and effective, and has advantages in thoracic lymph node dissection, bringing more benefits to the patients, so it is recommended to be popularized in clinical practice.