«上一篇/Previous Article|本期目录/Table of Contents|下一篇/Next Article»

《国际消化病杂志》[ISSN:1673-534X/CN:31-1953/R]

期数:

2018年03期

页码:

191-194,212

栏目:

出版日期:

2018-06-25

文章信息/Info

Title:

Impact of different wide gastric conduits on perfusion status of anastomosis in esophagectomy

作者:

蒋晓侠 汪 灏 沈亚星 方 勇 谭黎杰

200125 上海市浦东新区浦南医院胸外科(蒋晓侠); 200032 上海,复旦大学附属中山医院胸外科(汪灏、沈亚星、方勇、谭黎杰)

Author(s):

JIANG Xiaoxia; WANG Hao;  SHEN Yaxing;  FANG Yong;  TAN Lijie

Department of Thoracic Surgery, Punan Hospital, Shanghai(200125), China; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University, Shanghai(200032), China

关键词:

管状胃;  吻合口血流灌注;  食管癌切除术

Keywords:

Gastric conduit;  Perfusion status of anastomosis;  Esophagectomy

分类号:

-

DOI:

10.3969/j.issn.1673-534X.2018.03.010

文献标识码:

-

摘要:

目的 比较不同宽度的管状胃对于吻合口组织微循环血流的影响。方法 回顾性分析2017年1月至2017年12月在复旦大学附属中山医院行微创食管癌切除术的80例患者,其中40例采用常规5 cm宽度的管状胃(作为宽管状胃组),40例采用3 cm宽度的管状胃(作为细管状胃组)。术中采用激光多普勒血流仪检测两组管状胃吻合口区域的血流灌注值,同时比较两组的临床结果。结果 两组患者在年龄、性别、体质指数、肿瘤部位、病理类型、术后病理分期方面的差异均无统计学意义,两组总手术时间、出血量、清扫淋巴结个数的差异均无统计学意义。两组管状胃的组织血流灌注值在基线水平一致,细管状胃组吻合口的组织微循环血流值明显高于宽管状胃组[(50.3±9.1)U比(42.6±7.4)U,P=0.000]。与宽管状胃组比较,细管状胃组的总体并发症发生率及颈部吻合口瘘的发生率更低,但差异无统计学意义。结论 细管状胃的吻合口组织微循环血流灌注值优于宽管状胃,可能有利于减少吻合口瘘的发生。

Abstract:

Objective An attempt was made in this paper to compare the impact of different wide gastric conduits on the perfusion status of anastomosis in esophagectomy.Methods In this retrospective study, eighty patients with esophageal cancer undergoing minimally i

参考文献/References

1 Wright CD, Kucharczuk JC, O’Brien SM, et al. Predictors of major morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database risk adjustment model[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2009, 137(3): 587-595.
2 Worni M, Martin J, Gloor B, et al. Does surgery improve outcomes for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma? An analysis using the surveillance epidemiology and end results registry from 1998 to 2008[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2012, 215(5): 643-651.
3 毛友生, 赫捷, 程贵余. 我国食管癌外科治疗的现状与未来对策[J]. 中华肿瘤杂志, 2010, 32(6): 401-404.
4 Ryan CE, Paniccia A, Meguid RA, et al. Transthoracic anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: current trends[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017, 24(1): 281-290.
5 De Giacomo T, Francioni F, Venuta F, et al. Complete mechanical cervical anastomosis using a narrow gastric tube after esophagectomy for cancer[J]. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2004, 26(5): 881-884.
6 Wang H, Shen Y, Feng M, et al. Outcomes, quality of life, and survival after esophagectomy for squamous cell carcinoma: A propensity score-matched comparison of operative approaches[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2015, 149(4): 1006-1014.
7 Akiyama H, Miyazono H, Tsurumaru M, et al. Use of the stomach as an esophageal substitute[J]. Ann Surg, 1978, 188(5): 606-610.
8 Kayani B, Garas G, Arshad M, et al. Is hand-sewn anastomosis superior to stapled anastomosis following oesophagectomy?[J]. Int J Surg, 2014, 12(5): 7-15.
9 Laterza E, de’ Manzoni G, Veraldi GF, et al. Manual compared with mechanical cervical oesophagogastric anastomosis: a randomised trial[J]. Eur J Surg, 1999, 165(11): 1051-1054.
10 Nederlof N, Tilanus HW, Tran TC, et al. End-to-end versus end-to-side esophagogastrostomy after esophageal cancer resection: a prospective randomized study[J]. Ann Surg, 2011, 254(2): 226-233.
11 Haverkamp L, van der Sluis PC, Verhage RJ, et al. End-to-end cervical esophagogastric anastomoses are associated with a higher number of strictures compared with end-to-side anastomoses[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2013, 17(5): 872-876.
12 Haverkamp L, van der Sluis PC, Ruurda JP, et al. End-to-end versus end-to-side esophagogastrostomy after esophageal cancer resection: a prospective randomized study[J]. Ann Surg, 2014, 259(1): e6.
13 Takemura M, Yoshida K, Fujiwara Y. Modified triangulating stapling technique for esophagogastrostomy after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer[J]. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(4): 1249-1253.
14 Nakata K, Nagai E, Ohuchida K, et al. Outcomes of cervical end-to-side triangulating esophagogastric anastomosis with minimally invasive esophagectomy[J]. World J Surg, 2015, 39(5): 1099-1104.
15 Li J, Shen Y, Tan L. Cervical triangulating stapled anastomosis: technique and initial experience[J]. J Thorac Dis, 2014, 6(Suppl 3): S350-S354.
16 Markar SR, Arya S, Karthikesalingam A, et al. Technical factors that affect anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2013, 20(13): 4274-4281.
17 Diana M, Hübner M, Vuilleumier H, et al. Redistribution of gastric blood flow by embolization of gastric arteries before esophagectomy[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 2011, 91(5): 1546-1551.
18 Veeramootoo D, Shore AC, Wajed SA. Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic gastric ischemic conditioning prior to minimally invasive esophagectomy, the LOGIC trial[J]. Surg Endosc, 2012, 26(7): 1822-1829.
19 Shen Y, Wang H, Feng M, et al. The effect of narrowed gastric conduits on anastomotic leakage following minimally invasive oesophagectomy[J]. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 2014, 19(2): 263-268.
20 Logeman F, Roelofs JM, Obertop H, et al. Tonic motor activity of the narrow gastric tube used as an oesophageal substitute[J]. Eur J Surg, 2000, 166(4): 301-306.
21 Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients[J]. Ann Surg, 2012, 256(1): 95-103.
22 Liebermann-Meffert DM, Meier R, Siewert JR. Vascular anatomy of the gastric tube used for esophageal reconstruction[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 1992, 54(6): 1110-1115.
23 Ronellenfitsch U, Najmeh S, Andalib A, et al. Functional outcomes and quality of life after proximal gastrectomy with esophagogastrostomy using a narrow gastric conduit[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2015, 22(3): 772-779.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:

基金项目:吴阶平医学基金会临床科研专项资助项目(320.6750.17522)
作者单位:200125 上海市浦东新区浦南医院胸外科(蒋晓侠); 200032 上海,复旦大学附属中山医院胸外科(汪灏、沈亚星、方勇、谭黎杰)
通信作者:汪灏,Email: wang.hao@zs-hospital.sh.cn

常用功能

更新日期/Last Update: 2018-06-25