Aim of the study is to comprehensively review the latest trends in laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision(CME) with central vascular ligation(CVL) for the multimodal management of right colon cancer. Historical and ...Aim of the study is to comprehensively review the latest trends in laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision(CME) with central vascular ligation(CVL) for the multimodal management of right colon cancer. Historical and up-to-date anatomo-embryological concepts are analyzed in detail,focusing on the latest studies of the mesenteric organ,its dissection by mesofascial and retrofascial cleavage planes,and questioning the need for a new terminology in colonic resections. The rationale behind Laparoscopic CME with CVL is thoroughly investigated and explained. Attention is paid to the current surgical techniques and the quality of the surgical specimen,yielded through mesocolic,intramesocolic and muscularis propria plane of surgery. We evaluate the impact on long term oncologic outcome in terms of local recurrence,overall and disease-free survival,according to the plane of resection achieved. Conclusions are drawn on the basis of the available evidence,which suggests a pivotal role of laparoscopic CME with CVL in the multimodal management of right sided colonic cancer: performed in the right mesocolic plane of resection,laparoscopic CME with CVL demonstrates better oncologic results when compared to standard non-mesocolic planes of surgery,with all the advantages of laparoscopic techniques,both in faster recovery and better immunological response. The importance of minimally invasive mesoresectional surgery is thus stressed and highlighted as the new frontier for a modern laparoscopic total right mesocolectomy.展开更多
2018年10月31日是子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术的一个"转折点",《新英格兰医学杂志》(The New England Journal of Medicine,NEJM)在线发表了美国安德森癌症中心子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术(Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer,LACC)的...2018年10月31日是子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术的一个"转折点",《新英格兰医学杂志》(The New England Journal of Medicine,NEJM)在线发表了美国安德森癌症中心子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术(Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer,LACC)的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trial,RCT)研究结果[1]和美国哈佛医学院真实世界研究(real world study,RWS)结果工,两者都认为相比于传统开腹手术,早期子宫颈癌微创手术病死率、复发率均较高、而无瘤生存率(disease-free survival,DFS)和总体生存率(overall survival,OS)均较低这颠覆了腹腔镜手术既往在子宫颈癌治疗中的地位,也为妇科内镜界敲响了警钟。展开更多
Low rectal cancer is traditionally treated by abdominoperineal resection. In recent years, several new techniques for the treatment of very low rectal cancer patients aiming to preserve the gastrointestinal continuity...Low rectal cancer is traditionally treated by abdominoperineal resection. In recent years, several new techniques for the treatment of very low rectal cancer patients aiming to preserve the gastrointestinal continuity and to improve both the oncological as well as the functional outcomes, have been emerged. Literature suggest that when the intersphincteric resection is applied in T1-3 tumors located within 30-35 mm from the anal verge, is technically feasible, safe, with equal oncological outcomes compared to conventional surgery and acceptable quality of life. The Anterior Perineal Plan E for Ultra-low Anterior Resection technique, is not disrupting the sphincters, but carries a high complication rate, while the reports on the oncological and functional outcomes are limited. Transanal Endoscopic Micro Surgery(TEM) and Trans Anal Minimally Invasive Surgery(TAMIS) should represent the treatment of choice for T1 rectal tumors, with specific criteria according to the NCCN guidelines and favorable pathologic features. Alternatively to the standard conventional surgery, neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy followed by TEM or TAMIS seems promising for tumors of a local stage T1sm2-3 or T2. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision should be performed only when a board approved protocol is available by colorectal surgeons with extensive experience in minimally invasive and transanal endoscopic surgery.展开更多
AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer.METHODS:This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stagesⅡand...AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer.METHODS:This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2009[laparoscopic rectal resection(LRR),n=152;open rectal resection(ORR),n=254].Clinical characteristics,operative outcomes,pathological outcomes,postoperative recovery,and 5-year survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:Most of the clinical characteristics were similar except age(59 years vs 55 years,P=0.033)between the LRR group and ORR group.The proportion of anterior resection was higher in the LRR group than that in the ORR group(81.6%vs 66.1%,P=0.001).The LRR group had less estimated blood loss(50m L vs 200 m L,P<0.001)and a lower rate of blood transfusion(4.6%vs 11.8%,P=0.019)compared to the ORR group.The pathological outcomes of the two groups were comparable.The LRR group was associated with faster recovery of bowel function(2.8 d vs 3.7 d,P<0.001)and shorter postoperative hospital stay(11.7 d vs 13.7 d,P<0.001).The median followup time was 63 mo in the LRR group and 65 mo in the ORR group.As for the survival outcomes,the 5-year local recurrence rate(16.0%vs 16.4%,P=0.753),5-year disease-free survival(DFS)rate(63.0%vs63.1%,P=0.589),and 5-year overall survival(OS)rate(68.1%vs 63.5%,P=0.682)were comparable between the LRR group and the ORR group.Stageby stage,there were also no statistical differences between the LRR group and the ORR group in terms of the 5-year local recurrence rate(stageⅡ:6.3%vs 8.7%,P=0.623;stageⅢ:26.4%vs 23.2%,P=0.747),5-year DFS rate(stageⅡ:77.5%vs 77.6%,P=0.462;stageⅢ:46.5%vs 50.9%,P=0.738),and5-year OS rate(stageⅡ:81.4%vs 74.3%,P=0.242;stageⅢ:53.9%vs 54.1%,P=0.459).CONCLUSION:LRR for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer can yield comparable long-term survival while achieving short-term benefits compared to open surgery.展开更多
文摘Aim of the study is to comprehensively review the latest trends in laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision(CME) with central vascular ligation(CVL) for the multimodal management of right colon cancer. Historical and up-to-date anatomo-embryological concepts are analyzed in detail,focusing on the latest studies of the mesenteric organ,its dissection by mesofascial and retrofascial cleavage planes,and questioning the need for a new terminology in colonic resections. The rationale behind Laparoscopic CME with CVL is thoroughly investigated and explained. Attention is paid to the current surgical techniques and the quality of the surgical specimen,yielded through mesocolic,intramesocolic and muscularis propria plane of surgery. We evaluate the impact on long term oncologic outcome in terms of local recurrence,overall and disease-free survival,according to the plane of resection achieved. Conclusions are drawn on the basis of the available evidence,which suggests a pivotal role of laparoscopic CME with CVL in the multimodal management of right sided colonic cancer: performed in the right mesocolic plane of resection,laparoscopic CME with CVL demonstrates better oncologic results when compared to standard non-mesocolic planes of surgery,with all the advantages of laparoscopic techniques,both in faster recovery and better immunological response. The importance of minimally invasive mesoresectional surgery is thus stressed and highlighted as the new frontier for a modern laparoscopic total right mesocolectomy.
文摘2018年10月31日是子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术的一个"转折点",《新英格兰医学杂志》(The New England Journal of Medicine,NEJM)在线发表了美国安德森癌症中心子宫颈癌腹腔镜手术(Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer,LACC)的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trial,RCT)研究结果[1]和美国哈佛医学院真实世界研究(real world study,RWS)结果工,两者都认为相比于传统开腹手术,早期子宫颈癌微创手术病死率、复发率均较高、而无瘤生存率(disease-free survival,DFS)和总体生存率(overall survival,OS)均较低这颠覆了腹腔镜手术既往在子宫颈癌治疗中的地位,也为妇科内镜界敲响了警钟。
文摘Low rectal cancer is traditionally treated by abdominoperineal resection. In recent years, several new techniques for the treatment of very low rectal cancer patients aiming to preserve the gastrointestinal continuity and to improve both the oncological as well as the functional outcomes, have been emerged. Literature suggest that when the intersphincteric resection is applied in T1-3 tumors located within 30-35 mm from the anal verge, is technically feasible, safe, with equal oncological outcomes compared to conventional surgery and acceptable quality of life. The Anterior Perineal Plan E for Ultra-low Anterior Resection technique, is not disrupting the sphincters, but carries a high complication rate, while the reports on the oncological and functional outcomes are limited. Transanal Endoscopic Micro Surgery(TEM) and Trans Anal Minimally Invasive Surgery(TAMIS) should represent the treatment of choice for T1 rectal tumors, with specific criteria according to the NCCN guidelines and favorable pathologic features. Alternatively to the standard conventional surgery, neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy followed by TEM or TAMIS seems promising for tumors of a local stage T1sm2-3 or T2. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision should be performed only when a board approved protocol is available by colorectal surgeons with extensive experience in minimally invasive and transanal endoscopic surgery.
基金Supported by National Key Clinical Specialty Construction Project of China,the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China No.2012AA021103the Research Fund of Public Welfare in Health Industry,National Health and Family Planning Commission of China,No.201502039
文摘AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer.METHODS:This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2009[laparoscopic rectal resection(LRR),n=152;open rectal resection(ORR),n=254].Clinical characteristics,operative outcomes,pathological outcomes,postoperative recovery,and 5-year survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:Most of the clinical characteristics were similar except age(59 years vs 55 years,P=0.033)between the LRR group and ORR group.The proportion of anterior resection was higher in the LRR group than that in the ORR group(81.6%vs 66.1%,P=0.001).The LRR group had less estimated blood loss(50m L vs 200 m L,P<0.001)and a lower rate of blood transfusion(4.6%vs 11.8%,P=0.019)compared to the ORR group.The pathological outcomes of the two groups were comparable.The LRR group was associated with faster recovery of bowel function(2.8 d vs 3.7 d,P<0.001)and shorter postoperative hospital stay(11.7 d vs 13.7 d,P<0.001).The median followup time was 63 mo in the LRR group and 65 mo in the ORR group.As for the survival outcomes,the 5-year local recurrence rate(16.0%vs 16.4%,P=0.753),5-year disease-free survival(DFS)rate(63.0%vs63.1%,P=0.589),and 5-year overall survival(OS)rate(68.1%vs 63.5%,P=0.682)were comparable between the LRR group and the ORR group.Stageby stage,there were also no statistical differences between the LRR group and the ORR group in terms of the 5-year local recurrence rate(stageⅡ:6.3%vs 8.7%,P=0.623;stageⅢ:26.4%vs 23.2%,P=0.747),5-year DFS rate(stageⅡ:77.5%vs 77.6%,P=0.462;stageⅢ:46.5%vs 50.9%,P=0.738),and5-year OS rate(stageⅡ:81.4%vs 74.3%,P=0.242;stageⅢ:53.9%vs 54.1%,P=0.459).CONCLUSION:LRR for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer can yield comparable long-term survival while achieving short-term benefits compared to open surgery.
