首页> 外文期刊>Irish journal of medical science >Tubular stomach or whole stomach for esophagectomy through cervico-thoraco-abdominal approach: A comparative clinical study on anastomotic leakage
【24h】

Tubular stomach or whole stomach for esophagectomy through cervico-thoraco-abdominal approach: A comparative clinical study on anastomotic leakage

机译:小管胃或全胃经颈胸腹方式进行食管切除术:吻合口漏的比较临床研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Esophagectomy through cervico-thoraco-abdominal approach is a useful surgical technique in treating patients with esophageal cancer. However, the cervical reconstruction is also known to have a high rate of anastomotic leakage, as well as anastomotic stricture, intrathoracic stomach syndrome, reflux esophagitis and other complications, thereby influencing postoperative recovery and quality of life. Aims: The objective of this study was to investigate whether tubular stomach is superior to whole stomach in reducing anastomotic leakage for esophageal reconstruction through the cervico-thoraco-abdominal (3-field) approach. Methods: A total of 850 patients undergoing the 3-field esophagectomy were retrospectively included in this study and divided into a tubular stomach reconstruction group (Group A, n = 453) and a whole stomach reconstruction group (Group B, n = 397). All patients underwent esophagectomy through right thorax, left cervical part, abdominal triple incisions and done in esophageal reconstruction by hand-sewn two-layer anastomosis. Results: Results revealed that in comparison with whole stomach, esophageal reconstruction with tubular stomach had a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage (5.5 vs. 9.3 %, P < 0.05), less manifestation of intrathoracic syndrome (3.3 vs. 9.8 %, P < 0.001) and less occurence of reflux esophagitis (5.1 vs. 11.1 %, P < 0.01). However, for the incidence of anastomotic stricture, there was no significant difference between the two groups (9.3 vs. 9.8 %). Conclusions: This observation study suggests that for esophageal cancer patients undergoing the 3-field esophagectomy tubular stomach is better than whole stomach for esophageal reconstruction as reflected by a reduced postoperative anastomotic leakage, intrathoracic syndrome and reflux esophagitis.
机译:背景:通过颈-胸-腹部方法进行食管切除术是治疗食道癌患者的一种有用的手术技术。然而,众所周知,子宫颈再造术的吻合口漏率高,并且吻合口狭窄,胸腔内胃综合症,反流性食管炎和其他并发症,从而影响术后恢复和生活质量。目的:本研究的目的是研究通过颈-胸-腹部(3视野)方法在减少食管重建的吻合口漏方面,管状胃是否优于全胃。方法:本研究回顾性分析了850例行三眼食管切除术的患者,并将其分为管状胃重建组(A组,n = 453)和完整胃重建组(B组,n = 397)。所有患者均通过右胸,左颈部分,腹部三重切口进行食管切除术,并通过手工缝制的两层吻合术进行食管重建。结果:结果显示,与全胃相比,以小管胃进行食管重建术的吻合口漏发生率较低(5.5比9.3%,P <0.05),胸腔内综合征的表现较少(3.3比9.8%,P <0.001) ),反流性食管炎的发生率更低(5.1比11.1%,P <0.01)。但是,对于吻合口狭窄的发生率,两组之间没有显着差异(9.3%vs. 9.8%)。结论:这项观察性研究表明,对于食管癌患者,进行3场食管切除术的管状胃要比全胃好,因为术后吻合口漏,胸腔内综合征和反流性食管炎减少。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号