MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: [Application of Endo-GIA stapler in laparoscopic radicalcystectomy].
Author: Zhao QX, Yang FY, Chen D, Wu LY, Wang MS, Li XS, Wu S, Shi BK, Xing NZ.
Journal: Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Jun 23; 100(24):1872-1876. PubMed ID: 32575930.
Abstract:
Objective: To explore the application of Endo-GIA stapler in laparoscopic radical cystectomy, especially in the treatment of lateral bladder ligament, and to evaluate its clinical feasibility and practicability. Methods: A retrospective analysis of clinical data about 38 cases of laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) treated in the Department of Urology, Chaoyang Hospital of Beijing and Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from July 2017 to June 2019 were conducted. The patients were divided into Endo-GIA stopler group(18 cases) and non-Endo-GIA stopler group (20 cases) according to whether Endo-GIA stapler were used. The basic clinical data, operation time of bladder lateral ligament, operation time of bladder lateral wall, operation time of bladder resection, amount of bleeding during operation, pathological data after operation and related indicators of recovery after operation were compared between the two groups. Results: All 38 patients underwent radical cystectomy (RC) successfully under 3-D laparoscopy without conversion to open surgery. The operation time of bladder lateral ligament in Endo-GIA stapler group was significantly shorter than that in non-Endo-GIA stapler group [(3.25±0.75) min vs (9.20±2.95) min, P=0.042]; the operation time of bladder lateral wall in Endo-GIA stapler group was significantly shorter than that in non-Endo-GIA stapler group [(8.06±1.66) min vs (14.30±3.37) min, P=0.016]. The operation time of cystectomy in the Endo-GIA stapler group was significantly shorter than that in the non-Endo-GIA stapler group [(47.06±4.70) min vs (61.60±14.91) min,P=0.003]. The amount of bleeding in the Endo-GIA stapler group was significantly shorter than that in the non-Endo-GIA stapler group [(37.77±21.30) ml vs (114.50±39.80) ml, P=0.015]. The time of drainage tube removal in Endo-GIA group was significantly shorter than that in the non-Endo-GIA group [(5.83±1.54) d vs (7.30±3.00) d, P=0.002]. The length of post-hospitalization in Endo-GIA group was significantly shorter than that in the non-Endo-GIA group [(7.67±1.78) d vs (9.60±3.25) d,P=0.036]. However, there was no significant difference in other basic clinical data, post-operative pathology and post-operative recovery related indicators. Conclusions: Laparoscopic radical cystectomy using Endo-GIA stapler device is safe and feasible. It is easy to operate, shorten the operation time significantly, and reduce the amount of bleeding. To a certain extent, it is conducive to the recovery of patients after operation to some extent, and worthy of clinical application. 目的： 探讨直线切割闭合器（Endo-GIA）在腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除术中处理膀胱侧韧带的应用，评价其临床可行性和实用性。 方法： 回顾性分析2017年7月~2019年6月北京朝阳医院以及中国医学科学院肿瘤医院泌尿外科收治的38例腹腔镜下根治性膀胱切除术患者的临床资料，依据是否应用直线切割闭合器将患者分为Endo-GIA组（18例）和非Endo-GIA组（20例）。分别比较两组患者基本的临床资料，手术中膀胱侧韧带处理时间、分离膀胱侧壁时间、切除膀胱时间、术中出血量和术后病理以及术后恢复相关指标等方面的差异。 结果： 38例患者均在3D腹腔镜下顺利完成根治性膀胱切除术（RC），无中转开放。Endo-GIA组中膀胱侧韧带处理时间明显短于非Endo-GIA组[（3.25±0.75）与（9.20±2.95）min，P=0.042]；分离膀胱侧壁时间Endo-GIA器组明显短于非Endo-GIA组[（8.06±1.66）与（14.30±3.37）min，P=0.016]；膀胱切除时间Endo-GIA组明显短于非Endo-GIA组[（47.06±4.70）与（61.60±14.91）min，P=0.003]；术中出血量Endo-GIA组明显短于非Endo-GIA组[（37.77±21.30）与（114.50±39.80）ml，P=0.015]；Endo-GIA组拔除引流管时间明显短于非Endo-GIA组[（5.83±1.54）与（7.30±3.00）d，P=0.002]；Endo-GIA组术后住院时间明显短于非Endo-GIA组[（7.67±1.78）与（9.60±3.25）d，P=0.036]。而两组患者其他的基本临床资料、术后病理以及术后恢复相关指标差异无统计学意义。 结论： 腹腔镜下膀胱根治术中使用直线切割闭合器是安全、可行的，操作简便、明显缩短手术时间、减少出血量，在一定程度上有利于患者术后恢复，值得临床推广应用。.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]