ObjectiveTo summarize the current common clinical laparoscopic gastrointestinal tumor surgical localization methods, and to provide reference for clinicians to choose reasonable localization methods. MethodThe domestic and foreign literatures related to laparoscopic gastrointestinal tumor surgical localization methods were searched and reviewed. ResultsThe common localization methods for laparoscopic gastrointestinal tumor surgery were imaging localization, preoperative endoscopic localization, intraoperative endoscopic localization and intraoperative fluorescence localization, among which abdominal enhanced CT and endoscopic-related localization methods were the most commonly used localization methods in clinical practice at present. ConclusionA variety of methods are available for surgeons to choose from, and the precise localization of tumors is better facilitated by combining multiple methods.
Objective To compare the efficacy and incidence of complications between laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy on women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). Methods We did a systematic literature search for studies from Ovid Database, MEDLINE, EMbase, Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2008), Chinese Biological Medicine Database, CNKI, Chinese VIP Database, and WANFANG Database on internet. The search time was from establishment of each database to December, 2008. Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials were collected. The search was no limitation in language. We manually searched current and conference abstracts, and searched relevant reviews and their reference. RevMan 5.0 software was used for meta-analysis. Results Five non-randomized trials involving 417 patients were included. The results of meta-analyse showed that the short-term pregnancy rate in patients underwent laparoscopic surgery was significantly higher than that in patients underwent laparotomy (RR=1.42, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.80, P=0.003). The long-term pregnancy rate in patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy was comparable (RR=0.85, 95%CI 0.68 to 1.07, P=0.17). The regular menstruation in patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy was comparable (RR=0.91, 95%CI 0.79 to 1.05, P=0.18). The uterine adhesions in patients underwent laparoscopic surgery was significantly lower than that in patients underwent laparotomy (RR=0.02, 95%CI 0.00 to 0.18, P=0.000 2). The intra-abdominal adhesions of patients underwent laparoscopic surgery was significantly lower than that in patients underwent laparotomy (RR=0.02, 95%CI 0.00 to 0.13, Plt;0.000 1).Conclusions The limited evidence at present shows that the incidence and degree of pelvic adhesions occurred in patients with PCOS after laparoscopic surgery is much lower than those after laparotomy. It is not quite sure at this point about whether the pregnancy rate and regular menstruation of laparoscopic surgery are better than those of lararotomy or not. More evidence from high qualified multi-center studies is needed.
ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic surgery for overweight/obese patients with acute perforated or gangrenous appendicitis. MethodsFrom January 2007 to December 2014, patients with acute perforated or gangrenous appendicitis underwent laparoscopic (152 cases) or open (60 cases) appendectomy were collected, who were retrospectively classified into overweight/obese group (BMI≥25 kg/m2, n=69) or normal weight group (BMI < 25 kg/m2, n=143). Conversion rate, operation time, hospital stay, readmission, reoperation, and postoperative complications such as incision infection, abdominal abscess, and lung infection were analyzed. Results①The rate of conversion to open surgery had no significant difference between the overweight/obese group and the normal weight group[4.2% (2/48) versus 6.7% (7/104), χ2=0.06, P > 0.05].②The operation time of laparoscopic surgery in the overweight/obese group was significantly shorter than that of the open surgery in the overweight/obese group[(41.6±11.7) min versus (63.1±23.3) min, P < 0.01], which had no significant difference between the laparoscopic surgery in the overweight/obese group and laparoscopic surgery in the normal weight group[(41.6±11.7) min versus (39.6±12.7) min, P > 0.05].③The total complications rate and incision infection rate of the laparoscopic surgery in the overweight/obese group were significantly lower than those of the open surgery in the overweight/obese group[total complications rate:16.7% (8/48) versus 52.4% (11/21), χ2=9.34, P < 0.01; incision infection rate:4.2% (2/48) versus 33.3% (7/21), χ2=8.54, P < 0.01]. Although the total complications rate of all the patients in the overweight/obese group was increased as compared with all the patients in the normal weight group[27.5% (19/69) versus 14.7% (21/143), χ2=5.02, P < 0.01], but which had no significant difference between the laparoscopic surgery in the overweight/obese group and laparoscopic surgery in the normal weight group[16.7% (8/48) versus 12.5% (13/104), χ2=0.45, P > 0.05].④The reoperation rate of all the patients performed laparoscopic surgery was significantly lower than that of all the patients performed open operation[1.3% (2/152) versus 10.0% (6/60), χ2=6.7, P < 0.01].⑤The abdominal abscess rate, lung infection rate, and hospital stay after discharge had no significant differences among all the patients (P > 0.05). ConclusionLaparoscopic appendectomy could be considered a safe technique for overweight/obese patients with acute perforated or gangrenous appendicitis, which could not increase the difficulty of laparoscopic surgery and the perioperative risk.
Objective To investigate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy for distant gastric cancer. Methods All 18 patients with distant gastric cancer receiving laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy were analyzed. Results Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy was performed successfully in all patients. The mean operation time was (291.33±19.61) min. The mean blood loss was (151.32±71.78) ml. The mean numbers of harvested lymph node were 14.57±3.11. The mean time of gastrointestinal function recovery was (3.46±0.93) d, the mean out of bed activity time was (1.75±0.45) d. All patients were followed up for 1-24 months, mean 11 months. No local recurrence, trocar implant or distant metastasis happened. Conclusion Laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy is a feasible and safe surgical procedure combined with minimal trauma and fast recovery.
ObjectiveTo explore the causes of colon-anal anastomotic stenosis in patients with low rectal cancer after prophylactic ileostomy under complete laparoscopy. MethodsA total of 194 patients with low rectal cancer who received complete laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer combined with preventive ileostomy in our hospital from January 2020 to December 2020 were selected as the study objects, and were divided into non-stenosis group (n=136) and stenosis group (n=58) according to postoperative colon-anal anastomosis stenosis. The clinical data of the two groups were compared. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to analyze the factors affecting postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis, and stepwise regression was used to evaluate the importance of each factor. The risk prediction model of postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis was constructed and evaluated. ResultsIn the stenosis group, the proportion of males, tumor diameter ＞3 cm, NRS2002 score >3 points, manual anastomosis, left colic artery not preserved, anastomotic leakage, pelvic infection and patients undergoing neoadjuvant radiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were higher than those in the non-stenosis group (P<0.05). The results of univariate logistic analysis showed that female and preserving the left colonic artery were the protective factors for postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis (P<0.05), and the tumor diameter >3 cm, NRS2002 score >3 points, manual anastomosis, anastomotic leakage, pelvic infection, neoadjuvant radiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were the risk factors for postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis (P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that gender, tumor diameter, NRS 2002 score, anastomotic mode, anastomotic leakage, and pelvic infection were independent influencing factors for postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis (P<0.05). Stepwise regression analysis showed that the top three factors affecting postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis were NRS 2002 score, gender and anastomotic leakage. Multivariate Cox risk proportional model analysis showed that the multivariate model composed of NRS 2002 score, gender and anastomotic leakage had a good consistency in the risk assessment of postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis. Based on this, a risk prediction model for postoperative colon-anal anastomotic stenosis was constructed. The results of strong influence point analysis show that there are no data points in the modeling data that have a strong influence on the model parameter estimation (Cook distance <1). Receiver operating characteristic curve results showed that the model had good differentiation ability, the area under curve was 0.917, 95%CI was (0.891, 0.942). The calibration curve was approximately a diagonal line, showing that the model has good predictive power (Brier value was 0.097). The results of the clinical decision curve showed that better clinical benefits can be obtained by using the predictive model to identify the corresponding risk population and implement clinical intervention. ConclusionThe prediction model based on NRS 2002 score, gender and anastomotic fistula can effectively evaluate the risk of colon-anal anastomotic stenosis after preventive ileostomy in patients with low rectal cancer under complete laparoscopy.
From December 1995 to December 1997, 1 500 patients with gallstones or together with biliary duct stones accepted laparoscopic cholesystectomy (LC) or LC+laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDE). There were 9 had serious complications (0.6%) occured . While the mean age was 54.9 years old. The sex ratio (female∶male) was 1∶1.25. Three cases had major biliary duct disruption, 1 case had stomach perforation, 2 cases had duodenal injuries, 1 bleeding case because cystic artery fail to clip, 1 case had postoperative cystic duct leak, and 1 case with T-tube dislodgement. All complications had been discovered during or shortly after operations. The injuries on the extrahepatic biliary duct with lengths of 0.2-0.4cm, and the gastrodenal injuries sized 0.5-1.0cm. All of the injuries had been sutured laparoscopically without sequela. The one who had postoperative cystic duct leak and jaundice accepted LCDE, proved to have a common bile duct stone. The bleeding cystic artery had been clipped well, and the dislodged T-tube replaced well. The results show if the complications which may be very serious or complex had been discovered shortly after or during the operations, its can be managed with laparoscopic technique safely by experienced operators.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of robotic intersphincteric resection (ISR) for rectal cancer.MethodsA literature search was performed using the China biomedical literature database, Chinese CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library. The retrieval time was from the establishment of databases to April 1, 2019. Related interest indicators were brought into meta-analysis by Review Manager 5.2 software.ResultsA total of 510 patients were included in 5 studies, including 273 patients in the robot group and 237 patients in the laparoscopic group. As compared to the laparoscopic group, the robot group had significantly longer operative time [MD=43.27, 95%CI (16.48, 70.07), P=0.002], less blood loss [MD=–19.98.27, 95%CI (–33.14, –6.81), P=0.003], lower conversion rate [MD=0.20, 95%CI (0.04, –0.95), P=0.04], less lymph node harvest [MD=–1.71, 95%CI (–3.21, –0.21), P=0.03] and shorter hospital stay [MD=–1.61, 95%CI (–2.26, –0.97), P<0.000 01]. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the first flatus [MD=–0.01, 95%CI (–0.48, 0.46), P=0.96], time to diet [MD=–0.20, 95%CI (–0.67, 0.27), P=0.41], incidence of complications [OR=0.76, 95%CI (0.50, 1.14), P=0.18], distal resection margin [MD=0.00, 95%CI (–0.17, 0.17), P=0.98] and positive rate of circumferential resection margin [OR=0.61, 95%CI (0.27, 1.37), P=0.23].ConclusionsRobotic and laparoscopic ISR for rectal cancer shows comparable perioperative outcomes. Compared with laparoscopic ISR, robotic ISR has the advantages of less blood loss, lower conversion rate, and longer operation times. These findings suggest that robotic ISR is a safe and effective technique for treating low rectal cancer.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic magnetic compression cholangiojejunostomy (LMCCJ) with laparoscopic hand-sutured cholangiojejunostomy (LHSCJ). MethodsA retrospective case-control study was performed. From January 2019 to May 2022, 37 patients, who underwent laparoscopic treatment in this hospital, were enrolled in this study. There were 16 cases in the LMCCJ group and 21 cases in the LHSCJ group. The demographic information, procedure time to complete bilioenteric reconstruction, postoperative hospital stay, operative complications, magnets expulsion time, and follow-up results were collected and analyzed. ResultsThere were no statistical differences in the baseline data such as the gender, age, composition of primary diseases, preoperative total bilirubin, and preoperative common bile duct diameter between the two groups (P＞0.05). The outer diameter of the magnets was (10.50±0.97) mm, the expulsion time of the magnets was (49.69±37.58) d, and the expulsion rate of the magnets was 100% (16/16). There was no intestinal obstruction or gastrointestinal perforation caused by the retention of the magnets. The procedure time to complete bilioenteric reconstruction in the LMCCJ group was statistically shorter than that in the LHSCJ group [(11.31±3.40) min vs. (24.81±3.40) min, t=11.96, P＜0.01]. There was no statistical difference in the total bilirubin level at the first week after surgery between the two groups (U=142.0, P=0.80). The postoperative hospital stay in the LMCCJ group was longer than that in the LHSCJ group [(28.31±14.11) d vs. (16.19±7.56) d, t=3.36, P＜0.01]. During the perioperative period, there was no bleeding or biliary infection in the two groups, but one case of biliary leak in the LHSCJ group. In all 37 patients were followed-up for (548.8±259.2) d. During the follow-up period, the incidence rates of biliary intestinal anastomosis stenosis, tumor recurrence, and mortality had no statistical differences between the two groups (P＞0.05). ConclusionFrom the results of comparative analysis in this study, it can be concluded that LMCCJ is not only safe equally, but also easier and less time-consuming as compared with LHSCJ.
ObjectiveTo analyze the effect and prognosis of laparoscopic patch repair of esophageal hiatal hernia.MethodsFrom October 2014 to January 2019, 100 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease undergoing laparoscopic esophageal hiatus hernia repair were randomly divided into the patch group and the non-patch group. All patients underwent laparoscopic repair of esophageal hiatal hernia plus fundoplication (Nissen’s method). On that basis, the patients in the patch group used special mesh for esophageal hiatal hernia repair, while the ones in the non-patch group did not. All the patients were followed up for a long time. The operative effect, postoperative complication rate, recurrence rate, and satisfaction rate of the patients between the two groups were compared.ResultsA total of 98 patients were successfully followed up for more than one year, including 68 in the patch group and 30 in the non-patch group. One year after surgery, the differences between the patch group and the non-patch group in the improvements of reflux attack, heartburn, dysphagia, and food intake were statistically significant (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between the patch group and the non-patch group in satisfaction rate (82.4% vs. 73.3%, P>0.05); the differences in recurrence rate (2.9% vs. 26.7%) and incidence of dysphagia (47.0% vs. 6.7%) between the patch group and the non-patch group were statistically significant (P<0.05).ConclusionFor the patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease caused by esophageal hiatal hernia, the laparoscopic repair of esophageal hiatal hernia + Nissen fundoplication on the basis of reasonable selection of special mesh for esophageal hiatal hernia can obtain satisfactory clinical effect.
ObjectiveTo compare clinical efficacy between transumbilical three-port laparoscopic surgery (TU-TPLS) and transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic surgery (TU-SILS) in repair of acute peptic ulcer perforation. MethodsThe patients with acute peptic ulcer perforation who underwent TU-TPLS or TU-SILS in Chengdu Second People’s Hospital Affiliated to Sichuan University from January 2022 to December 2024 were retrospectively collected, and then were divided into the TU-TPLS group and TU-SILS group. The operation time, postoperative 24 h incision pain score (visual analogue scale) , postoperative hospital stay, total hospitalization cost, incision scar score (Vancouver scar scale), comprehensive satisfaction, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. ResultsA total of 105 patients met the inclusion criteria were enrolled, comprising 50 patients in the TU-TPLS group and 55 patients in the TU-SILS. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, such as gender, age, body mass index, perforation site, perforation diameter, and Boey score (all P>0.05). Postoperatively, the TU-TPLS group demonstrated significantly lower visual analogue scale pain score at 24 h compared to the TU-SILS group [(2.34±0.63) score vs. (3.22±1.05) score, P<0.001] and significantly higher comprehensive satisfaction score [(7.60±0.86) score vs. (7.02±1.01) score, P=0.002]. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the TU-TPLS group and TU-SILS group regarding operative time [(71.84±10.51) min vs. (69.78±7.98) min, P=0.257], postoperative hospital stay [(10.35±2.08) d vs. (9.96±1.75) d, P=0.310], or total hospitalization costs [(20 856.23±4 095.73) yuan vs. (19 988.83±2 933.43) yuan, P=0.212]. The incidence of umbilical wound infection was 1 case in the TU-TPLS group and 3 cases in the TU-SILS group (P=0.619). Postoperative residual intra-abdominal infection occurred in 2 cases in the TU-TPLS group and 1 case in the TU-SILS group (P=0.604). Incisional bleeding occurred in 0 cases in the TU-TPLS group and 1 case in the TU-SILS group (P>0.999). Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the scar assessment score between the TU-TPLS group and TU-SILS group [(3.11±1.13) score vs. (2.92±0.70) score, P=0.301] at the 2-month postoperative follow-up. ConclusionsBoth TU-TPLS and TU-SILS have achieved good therapeutic effects in treatment of acute peptic ulcer perforation. However, TU-TPLS has more advantages over TU-SILS. TU-TPLS causes milder incision pain, leads to higher patient satisfaction, and does not require special equipment.