达芬奇机器人手术系统辅助胃癌根治术的临床疗效

Clinical efficacy of Da Vinci robot-assisted radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer

  • 摘要: 目的:探讨达芬奇机器人手术系统辅助胃癌根治术的临床疗效。
    方法:采用回顾性队列研究方法。收集2016年6月至2018年6月中国人民解放军联勤保障部队第九四○医院收治的472例行胃癌根治术患者的临床病理资料;男372例,女100例;年龄为(57±11)岁,年龄范围为17~85岁。472例患者术前均行消化道造影、MRI、CT或胃肠镜检查,并经活组织病理学检查明确诊断为胃癌。472例患者中,241例行达芬奇机器人手术系统辅助胃癌根治术设为机器人组;231例行腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术,设为腹腔镜组。观察指标:(1)手术情况。(2)术后情况。(3)随访和生存情况。采用门诊和电话方式进行随访,了解患者肿瘤复发转移情况和生存情况。随访时间截至2019年1月30日。正态分布的计量资料以Mean±SD表示,组间比较采用t检验。偏态分布的计量资料以M(范围)表示,计数资料以绝对数或百分比表示,组间比较采用X2检验。等级资料比较采用秩和检验。采用Kaplan-Meier法计算累积生存率、带瘤生存率、肿瘤复发病死率,Log-rank检验进行生存情况分析。
    结果:472例患者均顺利完成胃癌根治术,均为R0切缘。机器人组行全胃切除+D2淋巴结清扫+RouxenY吻合术,行远端胃大部分切除+D2淋巴结清扫+Billroth Ⅱ式吻合术,手术时间,上切缘距离,下切缘距离,肿瘤直径,肿瘤浸润深度(浅肌层、深肌层、浆膜下层、浆膜层)分别为107例,134例,(234±44)min,(4±3)cm,(6± 4)cm,(5±3)cm,8、17、32、184例;腹腔镜组上述指标分别为94例,137例,(239±46)min,(4±3)cm,(6± 4)cm,(5±3)cm,7、19、30、175例,两组比较,差异均无统计学意义(X2=0.200,2.459,t=-1.212,-1.074,-0.420,-1.236,Z=0.171,P>0.05)。机器人组术中出血量、全胃切除术淋巴结检出数目,远端胃大部分切除术淋巴结检出数目分别为(126±113)mL,(45± 14)枚,(36±18)枚;腹腔镜组上述指标分别为(149±132)mL,(39±14)枚, (30±16)枚,两组比较,差异均有统计学意义(t=-2.093,3.275,2.195,P<0.05)。(2)术后情况:机器人组患者术后胃肠道功能恢复时间,术后腹腔引流管拔除时间,住院费用分别为(2.6±0.6)d,(5.7±1.2)d,(100 157±44 888)元;腹腔镜组上述指标分别为(3.1±0.7)d,(7.0±3.0)d,(82 220±18 941)元,两组患者上述指标比较,差异均有统计学意义(t=-5.371,-3.212,5.603,P<0.05)。机器人组和腹腔镜组术后住院时间均为(12±6)d,两组比较,差异无统计学意义(t=0.755,P>0.05)。 472例患者术后发生并发症18例。机器人组患者吻合口瘘3例、胃瘫 2例、十二指肠残端瘘1例、肺部感染1例,术后并发症发生率为2.90%(7/241);腹腔镜组上述指标分别为4、1、1、3例,3.90%(9/231),两组患者术后并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(X2=1.503,P>0.05)。消化道瘘患者经再次手术探查并行持续冲洗负压吸引及营养支持治疗后好转出院。胃瘫、肺部感染患者经相应保守治疗后均康复出院。(3)随访和生存情况:472例患者中,404例获得术后随访,其中机器人组212例,腹腔镜组192例,随访时间为7~31个月,中位随访时间为19个月。机器人组与腹腔镜组患者3年累积生存率分别为96.70%与91.67%,两组比较,差异无统计学意义(X2=1.037,P>0.05)。随访期间,机器人组患者带瘤生存率、肿瘤复发病死率分别为0.47%、2.36%;腹腔镜组患者上述指标分别为1.04%、6.77%,两组患者上述指标比较,差异均有统计学意义(X2=3.198,4.208,P<0.05)。
    结论:达芬奇机器人手术系统辅助胃癌根治术安全、有效,可以减少术中出血量、缩短患者术后恢复时间、增加淋巴结清扫数目,但治疗费用增加。

     

    Abstract: Objective:To explore the clinical efficacy of Da Vinci robotassisted radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
    Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 472 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer in the 940 Hospital of the People′s Liberation Joint Service from June 2016 to June 2018 were collected. There were 372 males and 100 females, aged (57±11)years, with a range from 17 to 85 years. Patients underwent gastrointestinal angiography, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography or gastrointestinal endoscopy before surgery, and were diagnosed with gastric cancer by biopsy. Of the 472 patients, 241 underwent Da Vinci robotassisted radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer were allocated into robotic group and 231 underwent laparoscopyassisted radical gastrectomy were allocated into laparoscopic group. Observation indicators: (1) surgical situations; (2) postoperative situations; (3) followup and survival. Followup using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect the tumor recurrence and metastasis and survival of patients up to January 30, 2019. Measurement data with normal distribution were expressed as Mean±SD, and comparison between groups was done using the t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range). Count data were described as absolute number or percentage, and the chisquare test was used for comparison between groups. Comparison of ordinal data was done using the ranksum test. The accumulative survival rate, tumorbearing survival rate and mortality of tumor recurrence were calculated by the KaplanMeier method, and Logrank test was used for survival analysis.
    Results: (1) Surgical situations: 472 patients underwent successful operation, with R0 margin. Cases with total gastrectomy + D2 lymph node dissection + Roux-en-Y anastomosis, cases with distal subtotal gastrectomy + D2 lymph node dissection + Billroth Ⅱ anastomosis, operation time, upper margin distance, lower margin distance, tumor diameter, cases with shallow muscular invasion, deep muscular invasion, subserosal invasion and serosal invasion (depth of tumor invasion)were 107, 134, (234±44)minutes, (4±3)cm, (6±4)cm, (5 ±3)cm, 8, 17, 32, 184 in the robotic group, and 94, 137, (239±46)minutes, (4±3)cm, (6±4) cm, (5±3)cm, 7, 19, 30,175 in the laparoscopic group,respectively; there was no significant difference in above indicators between the two groups (X2=0.200, 2.459, t=-1.212,-1.074,-0.420,-1.236, Z=0.171, P>0.05). The volume of intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected in total gastrectomy, number of lymph nodes dissected in distal subtotal gastrectomy were (126±113)mL, 45±14, and 36±18 in the robotic group, and (149±132) mL, 39±14, 30±16 in the laparoscopic group, showing statistically significant differences between the two groups (t=-2.093, 3.275, 2.195, P<0.05). (2) Postoperative situations: the time to recovery of gastrointestinal function, time of postoperative abdominal drainage tube removal, and hospitalization cost in the robotic group were (2.6± 0.6)days, (5.7±1.2)days, and (100 157±44 888)yuan, respectively. The above indices of the laparoscopic group were (3.1±0.7)days, (7.0±3.0)days, and (82 220±18 941)yuan, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups (t=-5.371,-3.212, 5.603, P<0.05). The duration of postoperative hospital stay was (12±6)days in the robotic group and (12±6)days in the laparoscopic group, with no significant difference between the two groups (t=0.755, P>0.05). Eighteen out of 472 patients had complications. There were 3 cases of anastomotic leakage in the robotic group, 2 cases of gastroplegia, 1 case of duodenal stump, and 1 case of pulmonary infection, with a incidence of postoperative complication as 2.90% (7/241). There were 4 cases of anastomotic leakage in the laparoscopic group, 1 case of gastroplegia, 1 case of duodenal stump, and 3 cases of pulmonary infection, with a incidence of postoperative complication as 3.90% (9/231). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complication between the two groups (X2=1.503, P>0.05). Patients with digestive tract fistula were reexplored and performed continuous flushingnegative pressure aspiration and nutritional support treatment, and then discharged after improvement. Patients with gastroplegia and lung infection were discharged after corresponding conservative treatment. (3) Followup and survival: 404 out of 472 patients were followed up for 7-31 months, with a median followup time of 19 months, including 212 in the robotic group and 192 in the laparoscopic group. The 3year survival rates were 96.70% and 91.67% in the robotic group and laparoscopic group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (X2=1.037, P>0.05). During the followup, the tumorbearing survival rate and mortality of tumor recurrence of the robotic group were 0.47% and 2.36%, respectively, versus 1.04% and 6.77% of the laparoscopic group, with statistically significant differences between the two groups (X2=3.198, 4.208, P<0.05).
    Conclusion:The Da Vinci robotassisted radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer is safe and effective, which can reduce volume of intraoperative blood loss, shorten the postoperative recovery time, increase the number of lymph node dissection, however, it will increase the treatment expense.

     

/

返回文章
返回