目的探讨腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术的围术期疗效与安全性。方法回顾性分析2017年8月至2023年8月于空军军医大学西京医院接受腹腔镜下保脾胰体尾切除术的133例患者临床资料,根据手术方式不同分为Kimura组(77例)和...目的探讨腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术的围术期疗效与安全性。方法回顾性分析2017年8月至2023年8月于空军军医大学西京医院接受腹腔镜下保脾胰体尾切除术的133例患者临床资料,根据手术方式不同分为Kimura组(77例)和Warshaw组(56例),比较两组患者手术时长、术中出血量等围术期指标及术后胰瘘发生率、脾梗死等并发症发生情况。结果Kimura组和Warshaw组两组患者在手术时长[(215.8±64.8)min vs(193.5±77.6)min]、术中出血量[(194.2±53.7)mLvs(176.5±69.2)mL]、术后排气及禁食时间[2(1)d vs 3(1)d]、术后住院时间[9(4)d vs 8(3)d]等围术期指标及术后胰瘘(3例vs 4例)、脾梗死(0例vs 3例)、腹腔积液(3例vs 2例)、腹腔感染(2例vs 1例)等并发症发生情况方面比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术对于胰体尾良性及低度恶性肿瘤均是安全有效的手术方式,且围术期疗效相当。展开更多
BACKGROUND： Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy （SPDP） can be performed with either splenic vessel preservation （SVP） or resection [Warshaw procedure （WP）]. The aim of this study was to e...BACKGROUND： Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy （SPDP） can be performed with either splenic vessel preservation （SVP） or resection [Warshaw procedure （WP）]. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative clinical outcomes of patients undergoing both methods. DATA SOURCES： Database search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar was performed （2000-2014）; key bibliographies were reviewed. Qualified studies compar- ing patients undergoing SPDP with either SVP or WP, and as- sessing postoperative complications were included. Calculated pooled risk ratio （RR） with the corresponding 95% confidence interval （CI） by random effects methods were used in the meta-analyses. RESULTS： The search yielded 215 studies, of which only 14 observational studies met our selection criteria. The studies included 943 patients in total; 652 （69%） underwent SVP and 291 （31%） underwent WP. Overall, there was a lower incidence of splenic infarction （RR=0.17; 95% Ch 0.09-0.33; P〈0.001）, gastric varices （RR=0.16; 95% Ch 0.05-0.51; P=0.002）, and intra/postoperative splenectomy （RR=0.20; 95% Ch 0.08-0.49; P〈0.001） in the SVP group. There was no difference in in- cidence of pancreatic fistula （WP vs SVP, 23.6% vs 22.9%;P=0.37）, length of hospital stay, operative time or blood loss. There was moderate cross-study heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS： SVP is a safe, efficient and feasible technique that may be used to preserve the spleen. WP may be more suit- able for large tumors dose to the splenic hilum or those associ- ated with splenomegaly. Randomized clinical trials are justified to examine the long-term benefits of SVP-SPDP.展开更多
文摘目的探讨腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术的围术期疗效与安全性。方法回顾性分析2017年8月至2023年8月于空军军医大学西京医院接受腹腔镜下保脾胰体尾切除术的133例患者临床资料,根据手术方式不同分为Kimura组(77例)和Warshaw组(56例),比较两组患者手术时长、术中出血量等围术期指标及术后胰瘘发生率、脾梗死等并发症发生情况。结果Kimura组和Warshaw组两组患者在手术时长[(215.8±64.8)min vs(193.5±77.6)min]、术中出血量[(194.2±53.7)mLvs(176.5±69.2)mL]、术后排气及禁食时间[2(1)d vs 3(1)d]、术后住院时间[9(4)d vs 8(3)d]等围术期指标及术后胰瘘(3例vs 4例)、脾梗死(0例vs 3例)、腹腔积液(3例vs 2例)、腹腔感染(2例vs 1例)等并发症发生情况方面比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜下Kimura法和Warshaw法两种保脾胰体尾切除术对于胰体尾良性及低度恶性肿瘤均是安全有效的手术方式,且围术期疗效相当。
文摘目的?探讨腹腔镜Warshaw技术(laparoscopic Warshaw technique,lap-WT)在胰腺远端切除术保脾中的安全性。研究对于脾脏血管上附有大肿瘤患者预先计划lap-WT或尽早转换为lap-WT治疗的有效性。方法 2008年1月至2019年8月在周口市中心医院行腹腔镜下胰腺远端切除术的171例患者中,42例(24.6%)行lap-WT。42例患者按时间分为早期组(2008年1月至2016年12月,n=22)和晚期组(2017年1月至2019年8月,n=20)。其中早期组为保留脾血管失败后最后才转换为lap-WT的患者;晚期组为预先计划或尽早转换为lap-WT的患者。结果 42例患者中位手术时间181.1 min(141~223 min),中位出血量318.7 mL(125~498 mL),术后平均住院9.0 d(7~11 d)。术后发生并发症9例(21.4%),其中4例(9.5%)伴有胰瘘(ISGPF分级B、C);术后因出血再次手术1例。中位随访时间35个月,42例均没有出现明显的脾脏梗死或胃静脉曲张;所有患者均保守观察。在晚期组与早期组的比较中,晚期组平均手术时间(161.0 min vs 225.0 min,P=0.001)和平均手术出血量(230.1 mL vs 380.0 mL,P=0.016)均显著低于早期组。而两组的总并发症发生率无明显差异(P=0.468),胰瘘发生率无明显差异(P=0.667)。两组间的脾脏梗死(P=0.745)和胃静脉曲张(P=0.468)的发生率无明显差异。结论在胰腺远端切除术中作为保存脾脏的一种方法,严格控制适应证,lap-WT技术在某些病例中是一种安全的治疗策略。预先计划或尽早转换为lap-WT能够缩短手术时间,减少出血量,且不增加相应并发症。
文摘BACKGROUND： Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy （SPDP） can be performed with either splenic vessel preservation （SVP） or resection [Warshaw procedure （WP）]. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative clinical outcomes of patients undergoing both methods. DATA SOURCES： Database search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar was performed （2000-2014）; key bibliographies were reviewed. Qualified studies compar- ing patients undergoing SPDP with either SVP or WP, and as- sessing postoperative complications were included. Calculated pooled risk ratio （RR） with the corresponding 95% confidence interval （CI） by random effects methods were used in the meta-analyses. RESULTS： The search yielded 215 studies, of which only 14 observational studies met our selection criteria. The studies included 943 patients in total; 652 （69%） underwent SVP and 291 （31%） underwent WP. Overall, there was a lower incidence of splenic infarction （RR=0.17; 95% Ch 0.09-0.33; P〈0.001）, gastric varices （RR=0.16; 95% Ch 0.05-0.51; P=0.002）, and intra/postoperative splenectomy （RR=0.20; 95% Ch 0.08-0.49; P〈0.001） in the SVP group. There was no difference in in- cidence of pancreatic fistula （WP vs SVP, 23.6% vs 22.9%;P=0.37）, length of hospital stay, operative time or blood loss. There was moderate cross-study heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS： SVP is a safe, efficient and feasible technique that may be used to preserve the spleen. WP may be more suit- able for large tumors dose to the splenic hilum or those associ- ated with splenomegaly. Randomized clinical trials are justified to examine the long-term benefits of SVP-SPDP.
