中国胸心血管外科临床杂志

中国胸心血管外科临床杂志

机器人辅助食管癌根治手术的应用

查看全文

目的 总结机器人辅助食管癌根治手术的初步应用经验及分析短期治疗效果。 方法 纳入 2016 年 2 月至 2017 年 12 月 148 例在四川大学华西医院胸外科行机器人辅助食管癌切除和胸腹二野淋巴结清扫的食管癌患者,其中男 126 例、女 22 例,年龄(62.0±8.0)岁。收集患者的一般资料和围手术期指标,回顾性分析患者的术后短期治疗效果。 结果 McKeown 食管癌切除手术 106 例,Ivor-Lewis 食管癌切除手术 42 例,所有患者平均手术时间为(336.0±76.0)min,术中平均出血量(130.0±89.0)ml,平均淋巴结清扫(21±8)个,术后平均住院时间(12.0±7.2)d,术后并发症包括吻合口瘘 8(5.4%)例,声音嘶哑 23(15.5%)例,食管气管瘘 1(0.7%)例,肺部感染 13(8.7%)例,乳糜胸 4(2.7%)例和伤口感染 2(1.4%)例,无术中大出血病例及死亡病例。 结论 机器人辅助 McKeown 和 Ivor-Lewis 食管癌根治手术均安全可行,短期治疗效果良好。

Objective To present the initial clinical experience of robot assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer and to analyze the short-term outcomes of these patients. Methods Between February 2016 and December 2017, 148 patients with esophageal carcinoma underwent robotic esophagectomy and two-fields lymph node dissection. There were 126 males and 22 females at average age of 62.0±8.0 years. Demographic data, intraoperative characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results 106 patients underwent McKeown esophagectomy and 42 patients underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. The mean operation time was 336.0±76.0 min, the mean intraoperative blood loss was 130.0±89.0 ml, the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 21±8 and the mean length of postoperative hospital-stay was 12.0±7.2 days. Postoperative complications included anastomotic fistula (n=8, 5.4%), pulmonary infection (n=13, 8.7%), hoarseness (n=23, 15.5%), tracheoesophageal fistula (n=1, 0.7%), chylothorax (n=4, 2.7%) and incision infection (n=2, 1.4%). There was no intra-operational massive hemorrhage and in-hospital mortality. Conclusion Both robot assisted McKeown and Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy are safe and feasible with good early outcomes.

关键词: 食管癌; 达芬奇外科系统; 机器人手术

Key words: Esophageal neoplasms; da Vinci surgical system; robotic surgery

登录后 ,请手动点击刷新查看全文内容。 没有账号,
登录后 ,请手动点击刷新查看图表内容。 没有账号,
1. Chen W, Zheng R, Zhang S, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in China in 2013: an analysis based on urbanization level. Chin J Cancer Res, 2017, 29(1): 1-10.
2. Ruurda JP, van der Sluis PC, van der Horst S, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: A systematic review. J Surg Oncol, 2015, 112(3): 257-265.
3. Guo W, Ma X, Yang S, et al. Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of outcomes. Surg Endosc, 2016, 30(9): 3873-3881.
4. van Hillegersberg R, Boone J, Draaisma WA, et al. First experience with robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagolymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc, 2006, 20(9): 1435-1439.
5. Xylinas E, Ploussard G, Durand X, et al. Robot-assisted extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a review of the current literature. Urol Oncol, 2013, 31(3): 288-293.
6. Meredith K, Huston J, Andacoglu O, et al. Safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Dis Esophagus, 2018, 31(7).
7. Park SY, Kim DJ, Yu WS, et al. Robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy with extensive mediastinal lymphadenectomy: experience with 114 consecutive patients with intrathoracic esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus, 2016, 29(4): 326-332.
8. 张晓彬, 杨煜, 叶波, 等. 机器人辅助食管癌根治术的近期手术结果. 中国医师杂志, 2017, (7): 970-973.
9. van der Sluis PC, Ruurda JP, Verhage RJ, et al. Oncologic long-term results of robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol, 2015, 22(Suppl 3): S1350-S1356.
10. Zhang H, Chen L, Wang Z, et al. The learning curve for robotic mckeown esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg, 2018, 105(4): 1024-1030.
11. Gao Y, Wang Y, Chen L, et al. Comparison of open three-field and minimally-invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 2011, 12(3): 366-369.
12. Zheng Y, Zhao XW, Zhang HL, et al. Modified exposure method for gastric mobilization in robot-assisted esophagectomy. J Thorac Dis, 2017, 9(12): 4960-4966.
13. Zhu ZJ, Zhao YF, Chen LQ, et al. Clinical application of layered anastomosis during esophagogastrostomy. World J Surg, 2008, 32(4): 583-588.
14. Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg, 2012, 256(1): 95-103.
15. Verhage RJ, Hazebroek EJ, Boone J, et al. Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Minerva Chir, 2009, 64(2): 135-146.
16. Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, et al. The world's first obesity surgery performed by a surgeon at a distance. Obes Surg, 1999, 9(2): 206-209.
17. Melvin WS, Needleman BJ, Krause KR, et al. Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery. Initial experience in foregut surgery. Surg Endosc, 2002, 16(12): 1790-1792.
18. Park S, Hwang Y, Lee HJ, et al. Comparison of robot-assisted esophagectomy and thoracoscopic esophagectomy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J Thorac Dis, 2016, 8(10): 2853-2861.
19. Abbott A, Shridhar R, Hoffe S, et al. Robotic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in the elderly patient. J Gastrointest Oncol, 2015, 6(1): 31-38.
20. Dantoc MM, Cox MR, Eslick GD. Does minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) provide for comparable oncologic outcomes to open techniques? A systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg, 2012, 16(3): 486-494.
21. 徐志华, 张含露, 杨梅, 等. 达芬奇机器人与胸腹腔镜联合辅助McKeown食管癌根治术后患者短期疼痛的非随机对照研究. 中国胸心血管外科临床杂志, 2018, 25(5): 378-381.