新辅助化疗联合达芬奇机器人手术系统治疗进展期胃癌的安全性及短期疗效的临床研究
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.南京中医药大学;2.南京中医药大学附属医院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目(面上项目,重点项目,重大项目)


Assessment of Da-Vinci Robotic Surgery after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer
Author:
Affiliation:

1.Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine;2.The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的:探讨新辅助化疗联合达芬奇机器人手术系统治疗进展期胃癌的安全性和可行性。方法:回顾性分析2018年7月-2022年7月在南京中医药大学附属医院行术前新辅助化疗(SOX方案)联合腹腔镜或达芬奇机器人胃癌根治术的进展期胃癌151例,依据手术方式分为达芬奇机器人辅助胃癌根治术组(机器人组)和腹腔镜下胃癌根治术组(腹腔镜组),比较两组的临床资料、围手术期手术相关指标及术后康复指标。结果:两组的年龄[65(57-69)vs 66(58-71),P=0.228 ]岁,BMI(21.93±3.1 vs 22.76±3.09,P=0.14)Kg/m2,肿瘤大小[3.15(2.5-4.38)vs 3(2.3-4.5),P=0.66]cm,肿瘤位置(贲门:胃体:胃窦)[(19:16:25)vs(24:18:18),P=0.4]例,手术范围(近端:远端:全胃)[(8:26:26)vs(15:21:24),P=0.25]例,消化道重建方式(食管残胃吻合:BillrothⅡ:RouX-en-Y)[(10:24:26)vs(14:19:27),P=0.53]例,术前cTNM分期(Ⅰ:Ⅱ:Ⅲ:Ⅳ)[(0:31:29:0)vs(0:23:37:0),P=0.14]例,ypTNM分期(Ⅰ:Ⅱ:Ⅲ:Ⅳ)[(18:21:21:0)vs(13:24:23:0),P=0.58]例,细胞分化程度(高分化:中分化:中低分化:低分化)[(5:11:25;19)vs(8:13:23:16),P=0.75]例,肿瘤退缩分级(Ryan标准:0:1:2:3)[(7:7:30:16)vs(4:7:33:16),P=0.81]例,完全缓解(7 vs 4,P=0.34)例,部分缓解(37 vs 40,P=0.57)例,手术时间(217.42±61.5 vs 266.58±50.11,p<0.001)min,术中出血估计量(92.5±55.65 vs 64.33±43,p=0.002)ml,腹部切口长度(10(10-12)vs 10(4-12),P= 0.011)cm,淋巴结清扫数(31.4±11.12vs 32.2±12.97,P=0.7)枚,转移淋巴结数[1(0-5)vs 1(0-5),P=0.441]枚,术后疼痛评分[3.13±0.68 vs 2.85±0.68,P=0.02],术后首次流质饮食时间[88(72-120) vs 48(48-72),P<0.001]h,首次通气时间[72(48-72)vs 48(40-68)P=<0.001]h,,引流管拔管时间[144(120-168)vs 114(96-144),P=<0.001]h,术后住院时间[7(6-9)vs 6(5-8),P=0.014]d,住院费用[70932.5(59751.8-76644.8)vs 82833(71211-95597),P<0.001]元,术后并发症发病率[5%(3/60)vs 8.3%(5/60),P=0.46],术后30天内再入院[3 vs 2,P=0.65]例,术后30天内二次手术[2 vs 1,P=0.56]例,术后C反应蛋[69.12(57.76-69.12)vs 55.27(32.7-66.3)mg/l,P=0.004]mg/l ,白细胞计数[10.61(8.51-12.4) vs 9.02(7.94-9.88),P=0.001]×10^9/L,中性粒细胞计数[8.61(6.97-10.61)vs 7.18(6.28-8.18),P=0.001]×10^9/L,术后血清前白蛋白[117.67(110.33-126.08)vs 129.33(116.75-150.92),P<0.001]mg/L ,IL-6[9.28(9.12-9.31) vs 7.51(7.43-7.52),p<0.001]pg/mL,降钙素原[0.6(0.53-0.6)vs0.36(0.25-0.46) ,P<0.001]ng/mL 。机器人组中手术出血估计量、腹部切口长度、术后疼痛评分、术后首次流质饮食时间、首次通气时间、腹腔引流管拔除时间、术后住院时间要优于腹腔镜组,但手术时间、住院费用明显劣于与腹腔镜组,在淋巴结清扫数目、术后并发症、术后30天内再入院、术后30天内二次手术病例数在两组中无明显差异。结论:对于进展期胃癌采取术前新辅助化疗联合达芬奇机器人手术系统的策略是安全可行的,其术后并发症发生率与腹腔镜胃癌手术相似,达芬奇机器人手术系统是进展期胃癌新辅助化疗新的候选治疗方式。

    Abstract:

    Objective: To explore the safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with Da Vinci robotic surgery system for advanced gastric cancer. Methods: The respective cross-sectional study was conducted. 151 patients were retrospectively analyzed who underwent radical gastrectomy after two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SOX: oxaliplatin + tegafur) in the affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of traditional Chinese Medicine from July 2018 to July 2022. According to mode of operation, all patients were divided into Da Vinci robotic radical gastrectomy group (robot group) and Laparoscopic radical gastrectomy group (laparoscopy group). The general data, perioperative surgery related indexes and postoperative rehabilitation were compared between two groups. Results: Laparoscopic radical gastrectomy vs Da Vinci robotic radical gastrectomy group: Age [65(57-69)vs 66(58-71), P=0.228 ]years old; BMI(21.93±3.1 vs 22.76±3.09, P=0.14)Kg/m2; Tumor size [3.15(2.5-4.38)vs 3(2.3-4.5), P=0.66]cm; Location of tumor(Cardia:Body of stomach:Gastric antrum)[(19:16:25)vs(24:18:18), P=0.4]cases; Scope of operation(Proximal gastric:Distal gastric:total gastric)[(8:26:26) vs (15:21:24) , P=0.25]cases; Digestive tract reconstruction(Esophagogastroanastomosis:BillrothⅡ:Rou-en-Y)[(10:24:26) vs (14:19:27) , P=0.53]cases; Preoperative cTNM stage(Ⅰ:Ⅱ:Ⅲ:Ⅳ) [(0:31:29:0) vs (0:23:37:0),P=0.14]cases; pT stage[(13:5:32:10)vs(14:5:35:6), P=0.76]cases; pN stage [(29:13:9:9)vs(26:10:10:14), P=0.64]cases; ypTNM stage(Ⅰ:Ⅱ:Ⅲ:Ⅳ)[(18:21:21:0) vs (13:24:23:0), P=0.58]cases; Tumor differentiation(High differentiation:Intermediate differentiation:Middle-low differentiation:Poor differentiation)[(5:11:25;19) vs (8:13:23:16), P=0.75]cases; Tumor regression grade (Ryan score:0:1:2:3)[(7:7:30:16) vs (4:7:33:16), P=0.81]cases; Complete?response(7 vs 4,P=0.34)cases; Partial response(37 vs 40,P=0.57)cases; Operation time(217.42±61.5 vs 266.58±50.11,p<0.001)min; Volume of intraoperative blood loss(92.5±55.65 vs 64.33±43,p=0.002)ml; Length of abdominal incision [10(10-12)vs 10(4-12), P= 0.011]cm; Number of lymph nodes dissected in gastrectomy (31.4±11.12 vs 32.2±12.97, P=0.7); Number of metastatic lymph nodes [1(0-5)vs 1(0-5), P=0.441]; Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) [3.13±0.68 vs 2.85±0.68, P=0.02]; Liquid diet time [88(72-120)vs 48(48-72), P<0.001]h; Exsufflation Time [72(48-72)vs 48(40-68), P=<0.001]h; Time of postoperative abdominal drainage tube removal [144(120-168)vs 114(96-144), P=<0.001]h; Postoperative hospital stay [7(6-9)vs 6(5-8), P=0.014]d; Hospitalization cost [70932.5(59751.8-76644.8)vs 82833(71211-95597), P<0.001]yuan; Incidence of postoperative complications [5%(3/60)vs 8.3%(5/60), P=0.46]; 30-day readmission [3 vs 2 , P=0.65]cases; 30-day reoperation [2 vs 1, P=0.56]cases; C-reactive protein [69.12(57.76-69.12)mg/l vs 55.27(32.7-66.3)mg/l, P=0.004]; White blood cells [10.61(8.51-12.4)vs 9.02(7.94-9.88), P=0.001]×10^9/L; Neutrophils [8.61(6.97-10.61)vs 7.18(6.28-8.18), P=0.001]×10^9/L; Serum Prealbumin [117.67(110.33-126.08)vs 129.33(116.75-150.92), P<0.001]mg/L; Interleukin-6 [9.28(9.12-9.31)vs 7.51(7.43-7.52), P<0.001]pg/mL,procalcitonin [0.6(0.53-0.6) vs 0.36(0.25-0.46), P<0.001]ng/mL. The volume of intraoperative blood loss, length of abdominal incision, VAS, liquid diet time, exsufflation time, time of postoperative abdominal drainage tube removal and postoperative hospital stay in robot group were better than those in laparoscopy group, but the time of operation and hospitalization cost were significantly worse than those of laparoscopy group. There was no significant difference in the number of lymph nodes dissected in gastrectomy, incidence of postoperative complications, 30-day readmission and 30-day reoperation in two groups. Conclusion: For advanced gastric cancer, the strategy of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with Da Vinci robotic surgery system is safe and feasible, and the incidence of postoperative complications is similar to laparoscopic surgery. So, Da Vinci robotic surgery system is a new candidate for neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2022-12-06
  • 最后修改日期:2023-01-02
  • 录用日期:2023-03-02
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: