Objective To summarize selection of therapeutic method for isolated iliac aneurysms and analyze its advantages and disadvantages. Method The clinical data of 21 patients with isolated iliac aneurysms from January 2006 to January 2017 in this hospital were analyzed retrospectively. Results Four patients were treated with an open surgery such as the unilateral iliac prosthetic graft interposition, aorto-biiliac or aorto-bifemoral arterial bypass graft, ligation of internal iliac artery, etc.. Seventeen patients were treated with an endovascular treatment such as the unilateral iliac stent-grafts, bifurcated aortic stent-grafts, or coil embolization alone, etc.. One patient with ruptured isolated iliac aneurysms died during the endovascular repair, and the rest patients were cured after the operation. The average operative time was 2.83 h and 1.58 h, the average hospital stay was 17.5 d and 7.7 d respectively for the patients with the open surgery and the endovascular treatment. Except 1 case of type Ⅰ and 1 case of type Ⅱ endoleaks were found in the patients with the endovascular treatment, no complications such as the ureteral and intestinal injuries, the gluteal muscle claudication, and the sigmoid ischemia were found in all the patients. Seventeen cases were followed-up. The following-up rate was 85%. The following-up time was 1–60 months with an average of 22 months. During the following-up period, the grafts and stent grafts were patent and the aneurysm sac diameter was unchanged. The abscess of the iliac fossa occurred in 1 patient with systemic lupus erythematosus and improved after the symptomatic treatment. Two patients died of other diseases during the following-up period, and the rest had no obvious clinical symptoms. Conclusions Preliminary results of limited cases in this study show that endovascular repair and open surgery in treatment of appropriately selected patients with isolated iliac artery aneurysms is safe and effective. But in special situation, technical controllability of open surgery might be better than endovascular repair, treatment should be selected according to patient’s general condition and anatomy of aneurysm.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation versus traditional open surgical operation in the treatment of benign thyroid nodules.MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CBM, CNKI and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation versus traditional open surgery for benign thyroid nodules from inception to June 30th, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was then performed by RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 38 RCTs involving 4 078 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation might be more effective than traditional open surgery for the treatment of benign thyroid nodules (RR=1.09, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.19, P=0.04), and compared with traditional open surgery, ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation reduced the rate of postoperative complication (RR=0.26, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.31, P<0.000 01), shortened postoperative hospital stay (MD=–3.60, 95%CI –4.04 to –3.15, P<0.000 01) and the time consumed in operation (MD=–48.79, 95%CI –54.16 to –43.41, P<0.000 01), and reduced operative blood loss (MD=–22.02, 95%CI–23.87 to –20.17, P<0.000 01). Meanwhile, microwave ablation reduced the elevated levels of serum IL-6 content (MD=–10.34, 95%CI –10.70 to –9.97, P<0.000 01), serum CRP content (MD=–9.70, 95%CI –10.95 to –8.44, P<0.000 01) and serum TNF-α content (MD=–7.94, 95%CI –9.00 to –6.88, P<0.000 01).ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation may improve clinical efficacy and can reduce postoperative complications, bleeding volume, operation time, hospitalization days and postoperative inflammatory reaction. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.
ObjectiveTo compare the differences of clinical effects between the bilateral endoscopic breast reconstruction and the open breast reconstruction. MethodsThe clinical data of 28 female patients who underwent bilateral breast graft reconstruction in the Department of Breast Surgery of West China Hospital from January 2017 to January 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups: an endoscopic group (n=12, aged 41.3±8.9 years) and an open group (n=16, aged 41.6±8.8 years). The clinical data of the two groups of patients were compared. Results There was no significant difference in demographic and oncological data between the two groups (P>0.05). There was a significant difference in the implants between the two groups (P=0.008). The operation time (298.2±108.6 min vs. 326.5±95.8 min, P=0.480) and anesthesia time (373.4±91.2 min vs. 400.3±97.1 min, P=0.463) were not significantly different. The total complications (P=0.035) and major complications (P=0.024) in the open group were more than those in the endoscopic group. For the comparison of breast satisfaction, psychosocial well-being and sexual well-being, the scores at six months and one year after surgery were higher in the endoscopic group than those in the open group (P<0.05). ConclusionThe endoscopic reconstruction is safe and effective, with high satisfaction rates regarding breast reconstruction and quality of life, and is superior to conventional open surgery.
Objective To compare efficacy of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in treatment of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Methods The relevant literatures were retrieved from databases including CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase from 2007 to 2017, all the relevant randomized controlled trial (RCT) or non-randomized controlled trial (NRCT) of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery in patients with rectal cancer were collected according to the inclusion and exclusion criterial. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures, extracted the data, and assessed the bias risk of the included studies. Then, the meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 11 RCTs and 9 NRCTs involving 2 036 patients with rectal cancer were included, of these, including 1 021 cases of laparoscopic surgery and 1 015 cases of open surgery. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the operation time was increased ［WMD=14.21, 95% CI (1.92, 26.51)］, the intraoperative blood loss ［WMD=–38.96, 95% CI (–60.29, –7.63)］, first postoperative exhaust time ［WMD=–0.86, 95% CI (–1.14, –0.57)］, first postoperative intake food time ［WMD=–0.89, 95% CI (–1.15, –0.62)］, and postoperative hospitalization time ［WMD=–2.38, 95% CI (–3.44, –1.32)］ were reduced in the laparoscopic surgery as compared with the open surgery; the rate of the sphincter-saving was increased ［OR=2.35, 95% CI (1.67, 3.30)］, the rates of the local recurrence ［OR=0.25, 95% CI (0.13, 0.47)］, postoperative overall complications ［OR=0.34, 95% CI (0.26, 0.43)］, infection of incision ［OR=0.39, 95% CI (0.25, 0.62)］, intestinal obstruction ［OR=0.30, 95% CI (0.17, 0.53)］, lung infection ［OR=0.32, 95% CI (0.18, 0.57)］, and anastomotic fistula ［OR=0.40, 95% CI (0.22, 0.73)］ were decreased in the laparoscopic surgery as compared with the open surgery; the intraoperative lymph node resection ［WMD=–0.99, 95% CI (–2.11, 0.12)］, the rates of the 3-year disease-free survival ［OR=0.91, 95% CI (0.54, 1.54)］, pelvic infection ［OR=0.64, 95% CI (0.17, 2.45)］, anastomotic bleeding ［OR=0.54, 95% CI (0.22, 1.34)］, urinary retention ［OR=0.71, 95% CI (0.34, 1.48)］, and urinary tract infection ［OR=1.22, 95% CI (0.45, 3.30)］ had no significant differences between these two surgeries. Conclusion Laparoscopy surgery is still safer, more effective, and more reliable than conventional open surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer, but it needs more clinical RCTs to further provide accurate and reliable results.
Objective To compare the effect of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery on the blood coagulation state in patients with gastric cancer, and to provide evidence for the prevention measurement of thrombosis in perioperative period. Methods One hundred patients with gastric cancer who received treatment in our hospital from Feb. 2014 to Aug. 2014, were randomly divided into laparoscopy group and laparotomy group, 50 patients in each group. The patients in laparotomy group were treated by traditionally open surgery, while patients in the laparoscopy group accepted laparoscopic surgery. The clinically therapeutic effect of 2 groups was compared. Results ① Operative indexes. The operation time, blood loss, anal exhaust time, hospital stay, and morbidity of laparoscopy group were all lower than those of laparotomy group (P<0.05). ② Coagulation function. Compared with preoperative indexes, the prothrombin time (PT) at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group and laparotomy group were both shorter (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and international normalized ratio (INR) between the 2 time points (before operation and 24 h after operation) in both 2 groups (P>0.05). Both at 2 time points (before operation and 24 h after operation), there was no significant difference in PT, APTT, and INR between 2 groups (P>0.05). ③ Fibrinolysis indexes. Compared with preoperative indexes, the fibrinogen (FIB) and D-dimer at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group and laparotomy group were higher (P<0.05). The FIB and D-dimer at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group were both higher than those of laparotomy group (P<0.05). ④ Follow-up results. There was no significant difference in metastasis rate, recurrence rate, and mortality between the 2 groups (P>0.05), but the incidence of thrombus was higher in laparoscopy group than that of laparotomy group (P<0.05). Conclusions In the treatment of patients with gastric cancer, laparoscopic surgery has the advantages of less trauma, less blood loss, less complications, and so on. Laparoscopic surgery and open surgery both can lead to hypercoagulable state, but the effect of laparoscopic surgery is stronger than open surgery.
ObjectiveTo analyze the therapeutic effects of open surgery and endovascular treatment for mesenteric venous thrombosis.MethodsThe clinical data of 22 patients with mesenteric venous thrombosis from March 2005 to January 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. One patient underwent open surgery including removal of necrotic small intestine and thrombectomy of superior mesenteric vein immediately admission to the hospital. Five cases were treated with simple anticoagulation and cured. Sixteen cases received thrombolytic therapy after primary anticoagulant therapy.ResultsOne case who underwent open surgery died of multiple organ failure at 72 h after the surgery. Five cases who received simple anticoagulant reached clinical relief finally. Sixteen patients who received thrombolytic therapy achieved recanalization totally or partially. Three cases died during follow-up (3 months to 7 years, average) of which 1 died of recurrence of acute superior mesenteric venous thrombosis, 1 died of myocardial infarction, and 1 died of stroke.ConclusionsFor patients with symptomatic mesenteric venous thrombosis, if there is no intestinal necrosis, there will be encouraging results by interventional thrombolytic therapy. And the treatment effect needs further experience accumulation in more cases.
Objective To explore the incidence of postoperative recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia and its related risk factors. Methods The clinical data of 213 patients with abdominal incisional hernia treated in the General Surgery of Shaanxi Provincial People’s Hospital from January 2015 to December 2019 were collected retrospectively, and the incidence of postoperative recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia and its related influencing factors were analyzed. Results A total of 213 patients underwent a complete follow-up. The follow-up time was 3 to 60 months, and the median follow-up time was 46 months. A total of 24 cases (11.27%) of hernia recurred after surgery. The univariate analysis results showed that body mass index (BMI), hernia ring size, incarceration, recurrent hernia, history of multiple abdominal operations, postoperative incision complications, factors such as increased abdominal pressure, and whether the patch were used for postoperative recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia influences (P<0.05). Further logistic multi-factor analysis results showed that BMI [OR=1.14, 95%CI (1.01, 1.29), P=0.040], incarcerated hernia [OR=8.94, 95%CI (1.94, 40.98), P=0.005], recurrent hernia [OR=10.91, 95%CI (2.09, 56.84), P=0.005], and hernia ring size [OR=1.15, 95%CI (1.03, 1.28), P=0.010] were related to the recurrence of abdominal incisional hernia after surgery (P<0.05). Conclusions The risk factors for hernia recurrence after abdominal incisional hernia repair include recurrent hernia, incarcerated hernia, hernia ring size, and BMI. For patients with high-risk factors, corresponding measures should be taken to prevent hernia recurrence.
Objective To investigate short-term effectiveness and clinical application advantages of orthopedic robot-assisted resection for osteoid osteoma compared with traditional open surgery. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data of 48 osteoid osteoma patients who met the selection criteria between July 2022 and April 2023. Among them, 23 patients underwent orthopedic robot-assisted resection (robot-assisted surgery group), and 25 patients received traditional open surgery (traditional surgery group). There was no significant difference (P>0.05) in gender, age, disease duration, lesion location and size, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and musculoskeletal tumor society (MSTS) score between the two groups. The surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative lesion localization time, initial localization success rate, infection, and recurrence were recorded and compared. VAS scores before surgery and at 24 hours, 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery and MSTS score before surgery and at 3 months after surgery were assessed. Results All patients completed the surgery successfully, with no significant difference in surgical time between the two groups (P>0.05). Compared to the traditional surgery group, the robot-assisted surgery group had less intraoperative blood loss, shorter lesion localization time, and shorter hospitalization time, with significant differences (P<0.05). The initial localization success rate was higher in the robot-assisted surgery group than in the traditional surgery group, but the difference between the two groups was not significant (P>0.05). All patients in both groups were followed up, with the follow-up time of 3-12 months in the robot-assisted surgery group (median, 6 months) and 3-14 months in the traditional surgery group (median, 6 months). The postoperative MSTS scores of both groups improved significantly when compared to those before surgery (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the changes in MSTS scores between the two groups (P>0.05). The postoperative VAS scores of both groups showed a gradually decreasing trend over time (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups after surgery (P>0.05). During follow-up, except for 1 case of postoperative infection in the traditional surgery group, there was no infections or recurrences in other cases. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative infection between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Orthopedic robot-assisted osteoid osteoma resection achieves similar short-term effectiveness when compared to traditional open surgery, with shorter lesion localization time.
ObjectiveTo assess the outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted surgery for treatment of advanced gastric cancer.MethodsA total of 115 patients with advanced gastric cancer were included between January 2014 and December 2018 were analyzed retroprospectively, the patients were divided into two groups: open surgery group (OS group, n=63) and laparoscopy-assisted surgery group (LAS group, n=52). Baseline characteristics, intraoperative parameters and postoperative items, and long-term efficacy were compared between the two groups.ResultsThere was no significant difference in preoperative baseline data including gender, age and preoperative serum parameters between the two groups (P>0.05). Intraoperative blood loss in the LAS group was significantly less than that in the OS group (P<0.05). In addition, the first feeding time after operation and postoperative hospital stay in the LAS group were significantly shorter than the OS group (P<0.05). Furthermore, numbers of white blood cells and neutrophils in the LAS group were fewer than that in the OS group at postoperative 2 days (P<0.05); the level of serum albumin in the LAS group was higher than that OS group (P<0.05). The number of lymph nodes detected during operation in the LAS group was more than that in the OS group (P<0.05). Operative time and occurrence of postoperative complications were not statistically significant between the two groups (P>0.05). One hundred and ten of 115 patients were followed- up, the follow-up rate was 95.7%. The follow-up time ranged from 6 to 48 months, with a median follow-up time of 12.4 months. The disease-free survival time of the OS group was 12.2±6.5 months, while that of the LAS group was 13.5±7.4 months. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsLaparoscopic technique in treatment of advanced gastric cancer has the minimally invasive advantage, less intraoperative blood loss, less surgical trauma, and faster postoperative recovery in comparing to the traditional open surgery. Also the lymph node dissection is superior to open surgery. The curative effect is comparable to that of open surgery.
Objective To investigate the impact of conversion to open in laparoscopic rectal cancer radical resection (LRR) on postoperative recovery. Methods The data from Feb. 2003 to Feb. 2007 of 176 cases who were given LRR and 32 cases receiving conversion in LRR (CRR) were analyzed retrospectively, and were compared about operation time, hospitalization time, hospitalization expenses, intraoperative blood loss, recovery time of bowel movement and postoperative complications with 59 cases of open rectal cancer radical resection (ORR). Results There were no differences among LRR, CRR and ORR about operation time, hospitalization time, intraoperative blood loss and recovery time of bowel movement (Pgt;0.05). The hospitalization expenses of LRR and CRR were higher than that of ORR (P=0.001, P=0.001), there was no difference between CRR and LRR (P=0.843). But the postoperative complications rate of ORR was higher than those of LRR and CRR （P=0.023,P=0.004）. Conclusion Compared with ORR, LRR has relatively conversion rate, and then increases the hospitalization expenses.