Background： Single port laparoscopic surgery （SPLS） is an innovative approach that is rapidly gaining recognition worldwide. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and safety of SPLS compared to con...Background： Single port laparoscopic surgery （SPLS） is an innovative approach that is rapidly gaining recognition worldwide. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and safety of SPLS compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of benign adnexal masses. Methods： In total, 99 patients who underwent SPLS for benign adnexal masses between December 2013 and March 2015 were compared to a nonrandomized control group comprising 104 conventional laparoscopic adnexal surgeries that were performed during the same period. We retrospectively analyzed multiple clinical characteristics and operative outcomes of all the patients, including age, body mass index, size and pathological type of ovarian mass, operative time, estimated blood loss （EBL）, duration of postoperative hospital stay, etc. Results： No significant difference was observed between the the pathological results between the two groups were found to two groups regarding preoperative baseline characteristics. However, be slightly different. The most common pathological type in the SPLS group was mature cystic teratoma, whereas endometrioma was more commonly seen in the control group. Otherwise, the two groups had comparable surgical outcomes, including the median operation time （51 min vs. 52 min, P = 0.909）, the median decreased level of hemoglobin from preoperation to postoperation day 3 （10 g/L vs. 10 g/L, P = 0.795）, and the median duration of postoperative hospital stay （3 days vs. 3 days, P = 0.168）. In SPLS groups, the median EBL and the anal exsufftation time were significantly less than those of the conventional group （5 ml vs. 10 ml, P〈 0.001; 10 h vs. 22 h, P〈 0.001）. Conclusions： SPLS is a feasible and safe approach for the treatment of benign adnexal masses. Further study is required to better determine whether SPLS has significant benefits compared to conventional techniques.展开更多
Objective: The great saphenous vein (GSV) is commonly used as a conduit for grafting during CABG surgery, and open GSV harvesting (OVH), commonly used with long incision to expose the vein. However, endoscopic vein ha...Objective: The great saphenous vein (GSV) is commonly used as a conduit for grafting during CABG surgery, and open GSV harvesting (OVH), commonly used with long incision to expose the vein. However, endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) is an alternative approach, utilizing specialized instruments and small incisions to harvest the vein. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on a cohort of patients who underwent Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) requiring great saphenous vein (GSV) harvesting which was done by EVH or OVH procedures. Demographic variables, including age and gender, were assessed for both groups. Intraoperative variables such as the number of grafts, cardiopulmonary bypass time, X clamp time, and type of procedure were analyzed. Postoperative variables, including infection and bleeding rates, were also evaluated. Results: The study included 30 patients each undergoing Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with need of great saphenous vein harvesting which was done by EVH and OVH. Demographic variables were well-matched between the two groups in terms of age, while a significant difference in gender distribution was observed. Obesity and smoking were more prevalent in the OVH group, and EVH was associated with a higher mean number of grafts compared to OVH. Conversion to an open technique occurred in a portion of the EVH cases, and infection rates did not significantly differ between the EVH and OVH groups. However, the incidence of postoperative bleeding was significantly higher in the EVH group. Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative variables associated with EVH and OVH techniques. EVH demonstrated advantages in terms of reduced infection rates compared to OVH. However, the higher incidence of postoperative bleeding associated with EVH raises concerns about potential risks.展开更多
Objective: Hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection has the advantages of open and laparoscopic surgeries.There is still lack of comparison of surgical outcomes between hand-assistied laparoscopic liver resection(HA...Objective: Hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection has the advantages of open and laparoscopic surgeries.There is still lack of comparison of surgical outcomes between hand-assistied laparoscopic liver resection(HALLR)and open liver resection(OLR). This study compared the surgical outcomes of the two approaches between wellmatched patient cohorts.Methods: Patients who received liver resection during January 2014 and October 2017 in Cancer Hospital,Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College were included in this retrospective study. Propensity score matching(PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias between the two groups. Operation and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the well matched groups.Results: During this period, 232 patients with a median age of 55.1 years old received OLR, while 49 patients with a median age of 54.7 years old received HALLR. Compared with HALLR group, OLR group has a higher proportion in male patients(190/232, 81.9% vs. 34/49, 69.4%, P=0.048) and lower albumin(43.2±4.5 vs. 44.8±3.7,P=0.020). After PSM, 49 patients from each group were included in the following analysis. Two groups were well balanced in their baseline characteristics, liver functions, preoperative treatments, abdominal surgery history, and surgical difficulty. None perioperative mortality was observed in both groups. Operation time and postoperative complications were similar in two groups(P=0.935, P=0.056). The HALLR group showed less bleeding amount(177.8±217.1 mL vs. 283.1±225.0 mL, P=0.003) and shorter postoperative stay period(6.9±2.2 d vs. 9.0±3.5 d,P=0.001).Conclusions: We demonstrated that hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe for liver resection,including some difficult cases. HALLR can provide better bleeding control and faster recovery after surgery.展开更多
Since its introduction in 2012,associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy(ALPPS)has significantly expanded the pool of candidates for liver resection.It offers patients with insuffici...Since its introduction in 2012,associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy(ALPPS)has significantly expanded the pool of candidates for liver resection.It offers patients with insufficient liver function a chance of a cure.ALPPS is most controversial when its high morbidity and mortality is concerned.Operative mortality is usually a result of posthepatectomy liver failure and can be minimized with careful patient selection.Elderly patients have limited reserve for tolerating the demanding operation.Patients with colorectal liver metastasis have normal liver and are ideal candidates.ALPPS for cholangiocarcinoma is technically challenging and associated with fair outcomes.Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma have chronic liver disease and limited parenchymal hypertrophy.However,in selected patients with limited hepatic fibrosis satisfactory outcomes have been produced.During the inter-stage period,serum bilirubin and creatinine level and presence of surgical complication predict mortality after stage II.Kinetic growth rate and hepatobiliary scintigraphy also guide the decision whether to postpone or omit stage II surgery.The outcomes of ALPPS have been improved by a combination of technical modifications.In patients with challenging anatomy,partial ALPPS potentially reduces morbidity,but remnant hypertrophy may compare unfavorably to a complete split.When compared to conventional two-stage hepatectomy with portal vein embolization or portal vein ligation,ALPPS offers a higher resection rate for colorectal liver metastasis without increased morbidity or mortality.While ALPPS has obvious theoretical oncological advantages over two-stage hepatectomy,the long-term outcomes are yet to be determined.展开更多
文摘Background： Single port laparoscopic surgery （SPLS） is an innovative approach that is rapidly gaining recognition worldwide. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and safety of SPLS compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of benign adnexal masses. Methods： In total, 99 patients who underwent SPLS for benign adnexal masses between December 2013 and March 2015 were compared to a nonrandomized control group comprising 104 conventional laparoscopic adnexal surgeries that were performed during the same period. We retrospectively analyzed multiple clinical characteristics and operative outcomes of all the patients, including age, body mass index, size and pathological type of ovarian mass, operative time, estimated blood loss （EBL）, duration of postoperative hospital stay, etc. Results： No significant difference was observed between the the pathological results between the two groups were found to two groups regarding preoperative baseline characteristics. However, be slightly different. The most common pathological type in the SPLS group was mature cystic teratoma, whereas endometrioma was more commonly seen in the control group. Otherwise, the two groups had comparable surgical outcomes, including the median operation time （51 min vs. 52 min, P = 0.909）, the median decreased level of hemoglobin from preoperation to postoperation day 3 （10 g/L vs. 10 g/L, P = 0.795）, and the median duration of postoperative hospital stay （3 days vs. 3 days, P = 0.168）. In SPLS groups, the median EBL and the anal exsufftation time were significantly less than those of the conventional group （5 ml vs. 10 ml, P〈 0.001; 10 h vs. 22 h, P〈 0.001）. Conclusions： SPLS is a feasible and safe approach for the treatment of benign adnexal masses. Further study is required to better determine whether SPLS has significant benefits compared to conventional techniques.
文摘Objective: The great saphenous vein (GSV) is commonly used as a conduit for grafting during CABG surgery, and open GSV harvesting (OVH), commonly used with long incision to expose the vein. However, endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) is an alternative approach, utilizing specialized instruments and small incisions to harvest the vein. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on a cohort of patients who underwent Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) requiring great saphenous vein (GSV) harvesting which was done by EVH or OVH procedures. Demographic variables, including age and gender, were assessed for both groups. Intraoperative variables such as the number of grafts, cardiopulmonary bypass time, X clamp time, and type of procedure were analyzed. Postoperative variables, including infection and bleeding rates, were also evaluated. Results: The study included 30 patients each undergoing Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with need of great saphenous vein harvesting which was done by EVH and OVH. Demographic variables were well-matched between the two groups in terms of age, while a significant difference in gender distribution was observed. Obesity and smoking were more prevalent in the OVH group, and EVH was associated with a higher mean number of grafts compared to OVH. Conversion to an open technique occurred in a portion of the EVH cases, and infection rates did not significantly differ between the EVH and OVH groups. However, the incidence of postoperative bleeding was significantly higher in the EVH group. Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative variables associated with EVH and OVH techniques. EVH demonstrated advantages in terms of reduced infection rates compared to OVH. However, the higher incidence of postoperative bleeding associated with EVH raises concerns about potential risks.
基金supported by PUMC Youth Fund/ Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 3332016031)National Key Research and Development Plan (No. 2016YFD0400604-03)
文摘Objective: Hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection has the advantages of open and laparoscopic surgeries.There is still lack of comparison of surgical outcomes between hand-assistied laparoscopic liver resection(HALLR)and open liver resection(OLR). This study compared the surgical outcomes of the two approaches between wellmatched patient cohorts.Methods: Patients who received liver resection during January 2014 and October 2017 in Cancer Hospital,Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College were included in this retrospective study. Propensity score matching(PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias between the two groups. Operation and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the well matched groups.Results: During this period, 232 patients with a median age of 55.1 years old received OLR, while 49 patients with a median age of 54.7 years old received HALLR. Compared with HALLR group, OLR group has a higher proportion in male patients(190/232, 81.9% vs. 34/49, 69.4%, P=0.048) and lower albumin(43.2±4.5 vs. 44.8±3.7,P=0.020). After PSM, 49 patients from each group were included in the following analysis. Two groups were well balanced in their baseline characteristics, liver functions, preoperative treatments, abdominal surgery history, and surgical difficulty. None perioperative mortality was observed in both groups. Operation time and postoperative complications were similar in two groups(P=0.935, P=0.056). The HALLR group showed less bleeding amount(177.8±217.1 mL vs. 283.1±225.0 mL, P=0.003) and shorter postoperative stay period(6.9±2.2 d vs. 9.0±3.5 d,P=0.001).Conclusions: We demonstrated that hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe for liver resection,including some difficult cases. HALLR can provide better bleeding control and faster recovery after surgery.
文摘Since its introduction in 2012,associating liver partition with portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy(ALPPS)has significantly expanded the pool of candidates for liver resection.It offers patients with insufficient liver function a chance of a cure.ALPPS is most controversial when its high morbidity and mortality is concerned.Operative mortality is usually a result of posthepatectomy liver failure and can be minimized with careful patient selection.Elderly patients have limited reserve for tolerating the demanding operation.Patients with colorectal liver metastasis have normal liver and are ideal candidates.ALPPS for cholangiocarcinoma is technically challenging and associated with fair outcomes.Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma have chronic liver disease and limited parenchymal hypertrophy.However,in selected patients with limited hepatic fibrosis satisfactory outcomes have been produced.During the inter-stage period,serum bilirubin and creatinine level and presence of surgical complication predict mortality after stage II.Kinetic growth rate and hepatobiliary scintigraphy also guide the decision whether to postpone or omit stage II surgery.The outcomes of ALPPS have been improved by a combination of technical modifications.In patients with challenging anatomy,partial ALPPS potentially reduces morbidity,but remnant hypertrophy may compare unfavorably to a complete split.When compared to conventional two-stage hepatectomy with portal vein embolization or portal vein ligation,ALPPS offers a higher resection rate for colorectal liver metastasis without increased morbidity or mortality.While ALPPS has obvious theoretical oncological advantages over two-stage hepatectomy,the long-term outcomes are yet to be determined.
