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 Ivor-Lewis 食管癌切除术研究进展

查看全文

手术是早期食管癌的首选治疗方式。微创食管切除术(minimally invasive esophagectomy,MIE)可以显著改善术后并发症发生率及死亡率,但由于食管周围解剖复杂,术中食管的暴露、分离、吻合及淋巴结清扫成为 MIE 手术中的难点。达芬奇外科手术系统(da Vinci surgical system)能提供 3D 视野、更加灵活及稳定的机械手臂,对完成精细外科操作有很大帮助,机器人辅助微创食管切除术(robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy,RAMIE)已经在包括我国在内的多个国家开展。机器人辅助 Ivor-Lewis 食管癌切除术(robot-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy,RAILE)是近些年开展的机器人经胸入路的一种手术方式,本文对目前已经开展的 RAILE 研究做一综述。

Surgery is the preferred treatment for early esophageal cancer. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) can significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative complications and mortality, but due to the complex esophageal anatomy, intraoperative esophageal exposure, separation, anastomosis and lymph node dissection are difficult. The da Vinci surgical system provides a 3D vision and a more flexible as well as stable robotic arm, which is very helpful in completing fine surgical procedures. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy(RAMIE) has been carried out in a number of countries, including China. Robot-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (RAILE) is a transthoracic approach of robots developed in recent years. This paper summarizes the current researches on RAILE.

关键词: 食管癌; 机器人辅助食管切除术; Ivor-Lewis

Key words: Esophageal cancer; robotic-assisted esophagectomy; Ivor-Lewis

引用本文: 周彬, 张亚杰, 李鹤成. 机器人辅助 Ivor-Lewis 食管癌切除术研究进展. 中国胸心血管外科临床杂志, 2018, 25(7): 616-621. doi: 10.7507/1007-4848.201711087 复制

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. Zhang Y. Epidemiology of esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol, 2013, 19(34): 5598-5606.
2. Domper Arnal MJ, Ferrández Arenas Á, Lanas Arbeloa Á. Esophageal cancer: Risk factors, screening and endoscopic treatment in Western and Eastern countries. World J Gastroenterol, 2015, 21(26): 7933-7943.
3. 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.
4. Sarkaria, Inderpal S. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: the Ivor-Lewis approach. Thorac Surg Clin, 2014, 24(2): 211-22.
5. Taurchini M, Cuttitta A. Minimally invasive and robotic esophagectomy: state of the art. J Vis Surg, 2017, 3: 125.
6. 王文凭, 陈龙奇. 食管癌外科治疗的现状与展望. 中国胸心血管外科临床杂志, 2011, 18(1): 58-65.
7. Salem AI, Thau MR, Strom TJ, et al. Effect of body mass index on operative outcome after robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: retrospective analysis of 129 cases at a single high-volume tertiary care center. Dis Esophagus, 2017, 30(1): 1-7.
8. 韩丁培, 项捷, 高涛涛等. 机器人辅助与传统 Ivor-Lewis 食管癌根治术近期疗效的比较. 中国微创外科杂志, 2016, 16(5): 404-407.
9. Hodari A, Park KU, Lace B, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy with real-time perfusion assessment. Ann Thorac Surg, 2015, 100(3): 947-952.
10. de la Fuente SG, Weber J, Hoffe SE, et al. Initial experience from a large referral center with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy for oncologic purposes. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(9): 3339-3347.
11. Huettner F, Dynda D, Ryan M, et al. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery; a useful tool in resident training--the Peoria experience, 2002-2009. Int J Med Robot, 2010, 6(4): 386-393.
12. Watson TJ. Robotic esophagectomy: is it an advance and what is the future? Ann Thorac Surg, 2008, 85(2): S757-S759.
13. Trugeda S, Fernández-Díaz MJ, Rodríguez-Sanjuán JC, et al. Initial results of robot-assisted Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy with intrathoracic hand-sewn anastomosis in the prone position. Int J Med Robot, 2014, 10(4): 397-403.
14. Bongiolatti S, Annecchiarico M, Di Marino M, et al. Robot-sewn Ivor-Lewis anastomosis: preliminary experience and technical details. Int J Med Robot, 2016, 12(3): 421-426.
15. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Hawn MT. Technical aspects and early results of robotic esophagectomy with chest anastomosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2013, 145(1): 90-96.
16. Wee JO, Bravo-Iñiguez CE, Jaklitsch MT. Early experience of robot-assisted esophagectomy with circular end-to-end stapled anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg, 2016, 102(1): 253-259.
17. Giugliano DN, Berger AC, Rosato EL, et al. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: approaches and outcomes. Langenbecks Arch Surg, 2016, 401(6): 747-756.
18. Briez N, Piessen G, Bonnetain F, et al. Open versus laparoscopically-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled phase Ⅲ trial - the MIRO trial. BMC Cancer, 2011, 11: 310.
19. Khan O, Nizar S, Vasilikostas G, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. J Thorac Dis, 2012, 4(5): 465-466.
20. Kuwabara S, Katayanagi N. Comparison of three different operative methods of video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Esophagus, 2006, 7(1): 23–29.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. Blencowe NS, Strong S, McNair AG, et al. Reporting of short-term clinical outcomes after esophagectomy: a systematic review. Ann Surg, 2012, 255(4): 658-666.
24. van der Sluis PC, Verhage RJ, van der Horst S, et al. A new clinical scoring system to define pneumonia following esophagectomy for cancer. Dig Surg, 2014, 31(2): 108-116.
25. Hou YL, Zhao JQ, Guo W, et al. Comparison of the short-term outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer after subtotal esophagectomy via thoracoscopy in left lateral position and in prone position. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi, 2012, 15(9): 950-953.
26. Low DE, Alderson D, Cecconello I, et al. International consensus on standardization of data collection for complications associated with esophagectomy: esophagectomy complications consensus group (ECCG). Ann Surg, 2015, 262(2): 286-294.
27. 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 Gastrointest Surg, 2013, 17(5): 872-876.
28. Horgan S, Berger RA, Elli EF, et al. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy. Am Surg, 2003, 69(7): 624-626.
29. Dolan JP, Kaur T, Diggs BS, et al. Impact of comorbidity on outcomes and overall survival after open and minimally invasive esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(11): 4094-4103.