吳金東 高志斌 江曉暉 朱漢達
?
ERAS外科理念在腹腔鏡輔助遠端胃癌根治術中的臨床應用研究
吳金東 高志斌 江曉暉 朱漢達
目的 研究ERAS(enhanced recovery after surgery)外科理念在腹腔鏡輔助下行遠端胃癌根治術中的臨床實用性。方法 抽取100例胃癌患者作為此次研究對象。將100例病患隨機分為4組,分別為常規組(行傳統開腹手術)、ERAS+開腹手術組(采用ERAS處理方法行傳統開腹手術)、腹腔鏡組(行腹腔鏡手術)、ERAS+腹腔鏡組(采用ERAS外科處理方法行腹腔鏡手術),術前分別記錄患者的一般情況(性別、體重、年齡)、術前1天(D0)ALB(血清白蛋白)水平,術后分別記錄手術指標、并發癥發生情況,檢測術后第4天(D4)、第7天(D7)的ALB水平。比較4組病患的ALB水平、并發癥等情況。結果 ①術前ALB水平為ERAS+腹腔鏡組組高于另外3組,但差異無統計學意義(P>0.05);術后ERAS+腹腔鏡組的ALB水平均比另外3組高,但ERAS+開腹手術組、腹腔鏡組ALB水平差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。D0~D4,ERAS+腹腔鏡組低于另外3組(P<0.05)。術后第4天、第7天腹腔鏡組病患的ALB水平明顯低于ERAS+腹腔鏡組(P<0.05);除常規組外的其他3組ALB水平明顯高于常規組(P<0.05)。②常規組、ERAS+開腹手術組不僅切口長度較腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組長,而且術中出血量明顯高于腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組。住院時間:常規組較其他3組時間長。③術后4組病患并發癥情況無明顯差異,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。結論 胃癌根治術采用ERAS外科理念行腹腔鏡手術是安全可行的。
ERAS;腹腔鏡技術;血清白蛋白;胃癌
(ThePracticalJournalofCancer,2017,32:421~424)
ERAS外科理念在此外科領域取得了巨大的成功[1]。ERAS外科理念包含術前準備,獲得病患以及家屬的配合,減輕病患的心理負擔以及生理疼痛;術中操作,采用系列經驗證并且有效的技術及措施[2],例如外科微創技術等;術后治療、護理、采用早期進食促進腸蠕動等行之有效的方法[3]。作為外科微創技術的代表,腹腔鏡技術的優越性得到了全世界的矚目,其技術切口小、出血量少、并發癥情況少。最近幾年,在胃癌根治手術中采用ERAS外科理念下行腹腔鏡技術已逐漸被接受并應用。本文旨在對比ERAS外科理念聯合腹腔鏡技術與開腹手術、腹腔鏡技術、ERAS+開腹手術在術前、術中以及術后的各項指標,為臨床治療提供可行性以及安全性實踐經驗以及數據。
1.1 一般資料
自2014年1月至2015年12月在南通市腫瘤醫院確診并接受治療的患者中,抽取100例患者作為此次研究對象。將100例患者隨機分為4組,分別為常規組(n=25),采用開腹手術;ERAS+開腹手術組(n=25),采用ERAS處理方法行開腹手術;腹腔鏡組(n=25),行腹腔鏡手術;ERAS+腹腔鏡組(n=25),采用ERAS外科處理方法行腹腔鏡手術。基本資料見表1。

表1 患者一般資料
1.2 納入標準
選擇患者標準:年齡20~70歲,性別不限;排除資料不全患者;排除患者急重癥;獲得患者以及家屬的同意。
1.3 處理方法
將患者分為4組,分別為常規組、ERAS+開腹手術、腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組。對照采用常規組,行開腹手術;ERAS+開腹手術,采用ERAS處理方法行開腹手術;腹腔鏡組,行腹腔鏡手術治療。分別記錄4組患者術前、術后的ALB水平(D0、D0~D4、D4、D7)、手術指標、住院時間、并發癥發生情況等。
1.4 統計學方法
所有統計數據應用SPSS20.0軟件處理,對數據進行統計處理分析,計數資料采用t檢驗,P<0.05表示差異有統計學意義。
2.1 對比4組患者術前、術后的ALB水平變化
手術前ERAS+腹腔鏡組的ALB水平高于另外其他3組。術后D0~D4 ERAS+腹腔鏡組與ERAS+開腹手術組無明顯差異,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05),且均低于常規組;術后D4、D7 ERAS+腹腔鏡組的ALB水平明顯高于另外3組,常規組比其他另外3組ALB水平低。見表2。
2.2 對比4組手術指標與住院時間
常規組、ERAS+開腹手術組較腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組手術切口長,且出血量高;常規組與ERAS+開腹手術組相比,差異無統計學意義;腹腔鏡組與ERAS+腹腔鏡組相比,差異無統計學意義。術后ERAS+腹腔鏡組住院時間較另外3組短。見表3。

表2 4組患者血清白蛋白水平變化
注:a為ERAS+腹腔鏡組 VS 腹腔鏡組,b為ERAS+腹腔鏡組 VS ERAS+開腹手術組,c為ERAS+腹腔鏡組VS常規組,d腹腔鏡組 VS ERAS+開腹手術組,e為腹腔鏡組 VS 常規組,f為ERAS+開腹手術組VS常規組。

表3 患者手術指標與住院時間
2.3 對比4組手術術后并發癥情況
4組患者的并發癥情況發生率分別為20%(5/25)、24%(6/25)、28%(7/25)、16%(4/25),差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。常規組、ERAS+開腹手術、腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組均有嘔吐、腹脹等不良癥狀,但均在胃管被拔出后轉好。常規組、腹腔鏡組在使用止血藥物后轉好。常規組、ERAS+開腹手術組、腹腔鏡組有肺部感染患者,在施與抗感染治療后轉好。ERAS+開腹手術組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組經腹部B超引導穿刺引流轉好。術后4組患者并發癥情況差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。并發癥情況對比見表4。

表4 4組并發癥情況/例
問世十幾年的ERAS外科理念是針對傳統處理措施的更新,而非技術革新,ERAS外科理念著重于降低病患的心理負擔以及生理疼痛,從而加速病患的康復。由于ERAS處理措施與傳統處理措施存在差異,使其可行性與安全性均遭遇到質疑,從而限制了其應用[4]。但是由于ERAS外科理念的臨床效果良好,而逐漸取得了認同,并被不斷的推廣,至今應用面已涉及到多個臨床領域,并且取得了巨大的成功。
由系列已被證實有效的措施聯合在一起協同作用而形成的ERAS外科理念,包含術前、術中、術后的營養支持、注重氧氣供給、早期進食、微創手術等[5-7]。術前對病患進行教育,減輕病患的心理以及生理壓力;術中選擇效果更好的麻醉處理方法,例如全麻醉時選用見效快、效用時間短的麻醉劑等,減少不適反應。術后早期下床、早期進食等。腹腔鏡手術指標的優越性有目共睹,就術中切口長度及出血量而言,其優于開腹手術,并且可多角度觀察,效果直觀,病患術后的并發癥發生情況都有減少,使病患更加快速的康復[8-13]。因此本文重點關注ERAS外科理念聯合腹腔鏡手術對胃癌根治術的治療會產生多大的益處。
相比于傳統開服手術,腹腔鏡手術在術中切口長度、出血量方面都有其優越性,并且在并發癥發生情況與生存幾率上并無差別,差異無統計學意義(P>0.05),而且高于傳統開腹手術。Kehlet經總結分析,得出腹腔鏡技術與傳統開腹手術相比較,并發癥情況明顯減輕。本研究中ERAS+腹腔鏡組的ALB水平高于另外其他3組。術后D0~D4 ERAS+腹腔鏡組與ERAS+開腹手術組差異無統計學意義(P>0.05),且均低于常規組;術后D4、D7的ALB水平為常規組比另外其他3組低,而ERAS+腹腔鏡組則遠遠領先于另外3組。常規組、ERAS+開腹手術組不僅切口長度較腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組長,而且術中出血量明顯高于腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組;腹腔鏡組、ERAS+腹腔鏡組組手術時間長于常規組、ERAS+開腹手術組;住院時間:常規組比另外3組時間長。且在臨床與手術指標方面行開腹手術組均劣于腹腔鏡組。
在ERAS外科的實施過程中要根據個體差異適當地調整方案[14-17],不能忽略個體化差異、限定在某一特定的流程,從而增加術后發生并發癥的概率[18-19]。同時不能為了追求提前出院而增加返院率。綜上所述,胃癌根治術中行腹腔鏡術,同時采用ERAS外科理念在臨床應用中是可行并且安全的。
[1] Adamina M,Kehelt H,Tomlison GA,et al.Enhanced recovery pathways optimize health outcomes and resourse utilization;A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trails in colorectal surgery〔J〕.Surgery,2003,149(6):830-840.
[2] S Muthusami,DS Prabakaran,JR Yu,et al.EGF-induced expression of Fused Toes Homolog (FTS) facilitates epithelial-mesenchymal transition and promotes cell migration in ME180 cervical cancer cells〔J〕.Cancer Letters,2014,351(2):252-259.
[3] Patel GN,Rammos CK,Patel JV,et al.Further reduction of hospital stay for laparoscopic colon resection by modification of the fast-track care plan〔J〕.Am J Surg,2010,199(3):391-394.
[4] Tsikitis VL,Holubar SD,Dozois EJ,et al.Advantages of fast-track recovery after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer〔J〕.Surg Endosc,2010,24(8):1911-1916.
[5] 王 剛,高 勇,江志偉,等.結直腸癌病人用加速康復外科理念行腹腔鏡手術對機體免疫功能的影響〔J〕.腸外與腸內營養,2012,19(1):3-7.
[6] Protic A,Turina D,Matani D,et al.Effect of preoperative feeding on gastric emptying following spinal anesthesia:a randomized controlled trial〔J〕.Wien Klin Wochenschr,2010,122(1-2):50-53.
[7] S Muthusami,DS Prabakaran,JR Yu,et al.FTS is responsible for radiation-induced nuclear phosphorylation of EGFR and repair of DNA damage in cervical cancer cells〔J〕.J Cancer Res Clin Oncol,2014,141(2):203-210.
[8] Lukaszwvicz-Zajac M,Mroczko B,Gryko M,et al.Comparison between clinical significance of serum proinflammatory proteins (IL-6 and CRP) and classic tumor markers (CEA and CA 19-9) in gastric cancer〔J〕.Clin Exp Med,2011,11(2):89-96.
[9] Leung KL,Kwok SP,Lam SC,et al.Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid Carcinoma:prospective randomized trial〔J〕.Lancet,2010,363(9416):1187-1192.
[10] Hasenberg T,Langle F,Reibenwein B,et al.Currrent perioperative practice in rectal surgery in Austria and Germany〔J〕.Int J Colorectal Dis,2010,25(7):855-863.
[11] Wang D,Kong Y,Zhong B,et al.Fast-track surgery improves postoperative recovery in patients with gastric cancer:a randomized comparison with conventional postoperative care〔J〕.J Gastrointest Surg,2010,14(4):620-627.
[12] Holm B,Kristensen MT,Myhrmann L,et al.The role of pain for early rehabilitation in fast track total knee arthroplasty〔J〕.Disabil Rehabil,2010,32(4):300-306.
[13] Sica GS,Iaculli E,Biancone L,et al.Comparative study of lapa-roscopicvs open gastrectomy in gastric cancer management 〔J〕.World J Gastroenterol,2011,17(41):4602-4606.
[14] Claeys MJ,de Meester A,Convens C,et al.Contemporary mortality differences between primary percutaneous coronary intervention and thrombolysis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction〔J〕.Arch Intern Med,2011,1771(6):544-549.
[15] Schiele F,Hochadel M,Tubaro M,et al.Reperfusion Strategy in Europe:temporal trends in performance measures for reperfusion therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction 〔J〕.Eur Heart J,2010,31(21):2614-2624.
[16] Kunisaki C,Makino H,Kosaka T,et al.Surgical outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer:a case-control study〔J〕.Surg Endosc,2010,26(3):804-810.
[17] 李國新.腹腔鏡輔助遠端胃癌D2根治術〔J〕.消化腫瘤雜志(電子版),2010,20(4):249-254.
[18] 王自強,余佩武,蔡志民,等.腹腔鏡與開腹遠端胃癌根治術同期臨床對比研究〔J〕.中國實用外科雜志,2006,26(5):359-363.
[19] 黃昌明,林建賢,鄭朝輝,等.腹腔鏡輔助胃癌根治術 1380例臨床療效分析〔J〕.中華胃腸外科雜志,2012,15(2):1265-1268.
(編輯:甘 艷)
Application of ERAS Unite with Laparoscopic Surgery-assisted Distal Gastrostomy for Stomach Cancer
WU Jindong,GAO Zhibin,JIANG Xiaohui,et al.
Nantong Tumor Hospital,Nantong,226361
Objective To study the clinical usefulness of ERAS surgical laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrostomy for stomach cancer.Methods 100 cases of stomach cancer were randomly divided into 4 groups,conventional group (row traditional open surgery),ERAS + open surgery group (treatment using ERAS row traditional open surgery),laparoscopic group (laparoscopic surgery),ERAS + laparoscopic group (ERAS surgical treatment using laparoscopic surgery),were recorded in general patients (sex,weight,age),1 day before surgery (D0) ALB (serum albumin) levels before and after operation surgery indicators were recorded,case of complications,detect postoperative day 4 (D4),on day 7 (D7) of the ALB level.ALB level among 4 groups of patients,complications,etc.Results ① Preoperative ALB level of ERAS + laparoscopic group was higher than the other 3 groups,ERAS + open surgery group,the laparoscopic group ALB levels continue to remain at a relatively high and stable level,the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05);postoperative ALB levels of ERAS + laparoscopic group was higher than the other 3 groups,ERAS + open surgery group,the laparoscopic group ALB levels continue to remain at a relatively high and stable level,the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05); D0 to D4,ERAS + laparoscopic group were lower than the other 3 groups,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).And postoperative day 4,day 7,ALB level of laparoscopic group was significantly lower than ERAS + laparoscopic group,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05);ALB level of the other 3 groups were significantly higher than the conventional group,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).② Length of the incision of the conventional group,ERAS + open surgery group was longer than laparoscopic group,ERAS + laparoscopic group,and blood loss of the conventional group,ERAS + open surgery group was significantly higher than laparoscopic group,ERAS + laparoscopic group.Length of stay of the conventional group was longer than the other 3 groups.③ postoperative complications of the 4 groups had no significant difference,the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05).Conclusion Gastrectomy using ERAS laparoscopy surgical concept is safe and feasible.
ERAS;Laparoscopy;ALB;Gastric cancer
226361 江蘇省南通市腫瘤醫院
10.3969/j.issn.1001-5930.2017.03.022
R735.2
A
1001-5930(2017)03-0421-04
2016-05-06
2016-09-26)