文章快速检索     高级检索
   中国临床医学  2021, Vol. 28 Issue (5): 813-817      DOI: 10.12025/j.issn.1008-6358.2021.20210752
0
腹腔镜与开腹再次肝切除治疗复发性肠癌肝转移患者的术后短期预后比较
朱凯 , 宋丹军 , 周俭 , 樊嘉 , 王晓颖     
复旦大学附属中山医院肝脏外科, 复旦大学肝癌研究所, 教育部癌变与侵袭原理重点实验室, 上海 200032
摘要目的: 探讨腹腔镜与开腹再次肝切除治疗复发性肠癌肝转移患者的术后短期预后情况。方法: 选择2011年1月至2019年12月接受肝脏再切除的289例复发性肠癌肝转移患者,其中40例接受腹腔镜手术,249例接受开腹手术。将腹腔镜及开腹组按1∶2进行倾向匹配评分,比较2组的围手术期情况。结果: 倾向匹配后,腹腔镜组及开腹组分别有40、80例患者纳入研究。2组均无围手术期死亡发生,输血率、肝门阻断时间、30 d内非计划再入院率差异均无统计学意义。与开腹组相比,腹腔镜组术中出血量更少(50 mL vs 200 mL,P=0.001),各级术后并发症发生率更低(25.0%vs 47.5%,P=0.030),术后住院时间更短(6 d vs 7 d,P=0.009)。结论: 复发性肠癌肝转移接受腹腔镜再次肝切除较接受开腹手术患者的围手术期预后更好。
关键词肠癌肝转移    复发    肝切除    腹腔镜    倾向匹配    
Short term postoperative prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis after laparoscopic versus open repeat liver resection
ZHU Kai , SONG Dan-jun , ZHOU Jian , FAN Jia , WANG Xiao-ying     
Department of Liver Surgery and Transplantation, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Liver Cancer Institute of Fudan University, Key Laboratory of Cancer Carcinogenesis and Invasion of Chinese Ministry of Education, Shanghai 200032, China
Abstract: Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of repeat laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) for patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM). Methods: A total of 289 patients with CRLM undergoing curative resection from January 2011 to December 2019 were enrolled and divided into LLR group (n=40) and OLR group (n=249). Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed as 1:2 in the LLR and OLR groups. The perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no perioperative death in the two groups. There was no statistically significant difference in blood transfusion rate, porta hepatis block time, and unplanned readmission rate within 30 days after surgery. After PSM, 40 patients in the LLR group and 80 patients in the OLR group were included. Compared with the patients in the OLR group, the intraoperative bleeding was less (50 mL vs 200 mL, P=0.001), the postoperative complication rate was lower (25.0% vs 47.5%, P=0.030), and the postoperative hospital stay was shorter (6 d vs 7 d; P=0.009) in the LLR group. Conclusions: CRLM patients who receive repeat LLR have better perioperative outcomes than those who receive repeat OLR.
Key words: colorectal cancer liver metastasis    recurrence    liver resection    laparoscopic    propensity score matching    

腹腔镜肝切除作为一种安全、有效的治疗方法,越来越被肝脏外科医生认可。已有大量研究[1-5]对腹腔镜以及开腹肝切除在肝细胞肝癌、肝内胆管癌及肠癌肝转移中的应用效果进行比较,证实对于特定患者,腹腔镜肝切除具有创伤小、患者恢复快、术后并发症发生率低等优势。

随着腔镜手术的技术愈发成熟,以及新技术(如荧光辅助腹腔镜、三维成像技术)的普及,越来越多的复发性肠癌肝转移能经腹腔镜手术切除。对于初发及复发的可切除肠癌肝转移,肝切除术能获得相似的疗效,患者预后优于姑息性治疗[6-8]。然而,对于复发性肠癌肝转移,由于前次肝脏手术引起的术区粘连及辅助治疗(化疗、靶向治疗等)引起的肝脏损伤,腹腔镜再次肝切除对外科医生仍是一项挑战[9-10]。本研究旨在比较腹腔镜与开腹再次肝切除治疗复发性肠癌肝转移围术期疗效及安全性。

1 资料与方法 1.1 一般资料

选择2011年1月至2019年12月复旦大学附属中山医院肝脏外科收治的接受肝脏再切除的复发性肠癌肝转移的患者289例,其中40例采用腹腔镜手术、249例采用开腹手术,均经病理检查证实为肠癌肝转移。收集患者的性别、年龄、肝脏手术史、化疗史、肿瘤情况、手术情况等。手术适应证严格按照指南[11]要求:(1)根据肝脏解剖结构和肠癌肝转移程度,在保留足够肝功能的情况下,可以完全切除转移病灶(R0);(2)患者无不适合手术的肝外转移,或只有肺部结节,不限制肝转移灶的切除。纳入标准:(1)接受肝脏再切除的复发性肠癌肝转移患者,年龄15~85岁;(2)有详细的病理资料;(3)有完整的临床数据;(4)已签署知情同意书,患者知情同意相关信息可用于医学研究。排除标准:急诊手术、有肝外转移、姑息性切除(R1、R2切除)、二期切除(ALPPS)及肝移植手术。本研究经复旦大学附属中山医院伦理委员会审批(B2021-280)。

1.2 围手术期指标

收集患者的围手术期指标,包括术中出血、是否输血、是否肝门阻断及阻断时间,术后并发症、住院天数,围手术期死亡情况,出院后30 d内因各种原因再入院情况[12]等。根据Clavien-Dindo分级系统,将患者并发症分为Ⅰ级、Ⅱ级和≥Ⅲ级。围手术期死亡定义为术后90 d内死亡。

1.3 统计学处理

采用SPSS 19.0进行统计分析。不符合正态分布的计量资料以M(P25, P75)表示,不同手术方式组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验;计数资料以n(%)表示,当总例数n < 40或有理论频数T < 1时用Fisher确切概率法验证,其余用Pearson χ2检验验证。倾向匹配评分利用Matchit包(R 3.5.2)。以患者的基本临床特征(年龄、性别、体质指数、基础疾病、手术史、药物史、肿瘤情况、术前肝功能、此次手术情况)作为协变量来进行倾向评分,将腹腔镜及开腹组按1∶2的“邻近匹配模式”匹配。检验水准(α)为0.05。

2 结果 2.1 匹配前一般资料分析

结果(表 1)显示:匹配前2组患者性别构成、高血压发病率、化疗史、肿瘤数量、肿瘤切除范围差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),余资料差异无统计学意义。

表 1 倾向匹配评分前腹腔镜及开腹组患者的基本临床特征比较 
n(%)
基本临床特征 腹腔镜组(n=40) 开腹组(n=249) χ2 P
年龄/岁 60(54, 66.5) 58(52, 66.5) 0.231
性别(女/男) 33/7 155/94 5.358 0.021
BMI>24 kg/m2 16(40.0) 120(48.2) 0.629 0.428
糖尿病 8(20.0) 36(14.5) 0.447 0.504
高血压 18(45.0) 60(24.1) 6.618 0.010
原发肿瘤位置 0.094
  右半结肠 7(17.5) 46(18.5)
  左半结肠 13(32.5) 108(43.4)
  直肠 20(50.0) 80(32.1)
  未知 0(0) 15(6.0)
已行肝脏手术 2.756 0.252
  1次 11(27.5) 60(24.1)
  2次 18(45.0) 144(57.8)
  ≥3次 11(27.5) 45(18.1)
前次手术为腹腔镜 28(70.0) 137(55.0) 2.575 0.108
化疗史 25(62.5) 198(79.5) 4.740 0.029
靶向药使用 8(20.0) 44(17.7) 0.018 0.893
最大肿瘤最大径>2 cm 22(55.0) 169(67.9) 2.006 0.157
肿瘤≥2枚 12(30.0) 124(49.8) 4.657 0.031
切除≥3段 6(15.0) 120(48.2) 14.121 0.001
术前PT > 13 s 4(10.0) 16(6.4) 0.497
术前ALB < 35 g/L 1(2.5) 4(1.6) 0.528
术前TB>20.4 μmol/L 5(12.5) 25(10.0) 0.583
术前ALT>50 U/L 2(5.0) 21(8.4) 0.752
    BMI: 体质指数; PT: 凝血酶原时间; ALB: 白蛋白; TB: 总胆红素; ALT: 丙氨酸转氨酶。
2.2 匹配后基本临床特征比较

结果(表 2)显示:将腹腔镜及开腹组按1∶2进行倾向匹配,腹腔镜组与开腹组分别纳入40、80例患者。2组患者各项临床资料差异均无统计学意义。

表 2 倾向匹配评分后腹腔镜及开腹组患者的基本临床特征 
n(%)
基本特征 腹腔镜组(n=40) 开腹组(n=80) χ2 P
年龄/岁 60(54.0, 66.5) 60(55.0, 64) 0.936
性别(女/男) 33/7 65/15 < 0.001 1.000
BMI>24 kg/m2 16(40.0) 38(47.5) 0.341 0.559
糖尿病 8(20.0) 15(18.8) < 0.001 1.000
高血压 18(45.0) 31(38.8) 0.211 0.646
原发肿瘤位置 0.273 0.873
  右半结肠 7(17.5) 15(18.7)
  左半结肠 13(32.5) 29(36.3)
  直肠 20(50.0) 36(45.0)
已行肝脏手术 1.084 0.582
  1次 11(27.5) 21(26.2)
  2次 18(45.0) 43(53.8)
  ≥3次 11(27.5) 16(20.0)
前次手术为腹腔镜 28(70.0) 50(62.5) 0.371 0.543
化疗史 25(62.5) 56(70.0) 0.385 0.535
靶向药使用 8(20.0) 15(18.8) < 0.001 1.000
最大肿瘤直径>2 cm 22(55.0) 48(60.0) 0.107 0.743
肿瘤≥2枚 12(30.0) 21(26.2) 0.047 0.828
切除≥3段 6(15.0) 12(15.0) < 0.001 1.000
术前PT>13 s 4(10.0) 9(11.2) 1.000
术前ALB < 35 g/L 1(2.5) 1(1.2) 1.000
术前TB>20.4 μmol/L 5(12.5) 9(11.3) 1.000
术前ALT>50 U/L 2(5.0) 3(3.8) 1.000
    BMI: 体质指数; PT: 凝血酶原时间; ALB: 白蛋白; TB: 总胆红素; ALT: 丙氨酸转氨酶。
2.3 匹配后围手术期情况比较

结果(表 3)显示:倾向匹配后,2组均无围手术期死亡发生,2组输血率、肝门阻断时间、30 d内非计划再入院率差异均无统计学意义;与开腹组相比,腹腔镜组术中出血量更少(50 mL vs 200 mL,P=0.001),各级术后并发症发生率更低(25.0% vs 47.5%, P=0.030),术后住院时间更短(6 d vs 7 d, P=0.009)。

表 3 倾向匹配评分后腹腔镜及开腹组患者的围手术期疗效及安全性比较
指标 腹腔镜组(n=40) 开腹组(n=80) χ2 P
出血量/mL 50(20,150) 200(60,600) 0.001
输血n(%) 0(0) 3(3.75) 0.550
Pringle肝门阻断n(%) 10(25.0) 24(30.0) 0.128 0.720
肝门阻断时间/min 15(10,20) 16(8,25) 1.000
Clavien-Dindo分级n(%) 10(25.0) 38(47.5) 4.727 0.030
  Ⅰ级 7(17.5) 34(42.5)
  Ⅱ级 3(7.5) 4(5.0)
  ≥Ⅲ级 0(0) 2(2.50)
术后住院时间/d 6(4, 10) 7(5.5, 17) 0.009
30 d内非计划再入院n(%) 1(2.5) 1(1.25) 1.000
3 讨论

与原发性肝癌相比,复发性肠癌肝转移有其特殊性,如多无肝硬化;患者接受过结肠手术,腹腔粘连可能较原发性肝癌重;患者有接受化疗或靶向治疗史,对肝脏造成不同程度的损伤,如肝紫癜;肠癌肝转移更易多发。腹腔镜肝切除术以局部创伤小、术后恢复快等优势,已在国际上获得认可[13-14]。虽然目前已有关于腹腔镜重复肝切除的研究[15-16],但仍较少。Morise[15]对复发性肝癌的研究提示,腔镜治疗手术时间更长,但术中出血更少,患者的预后相当。本研究利用倾向匹配评分法比较了腹腔镜与开腹再次肝切除治疗复发性肠癌肝转移的术后短期预后发现,腹腔镜再次肝切除治疗复发性肠癌肝转移安全有效。

复发性肠癌肝转移手术方式的选择受多种因素影响,如患者一般情况、前次手术情况、复发情况及预计切除范围等。本研究中,倾向匹配评分前,选择腹腔镜肝切除患者的肿瘤更小、数量更少。倾向匹配评分法是用于消除选择性偏倚的有效方法[17-18],能很好地均衡2组的各项参数[19]。经匹配后,去除了开腹组中肿瘤较大或数量较多的病例,降低腹腔镜及开腹组的基本临床特征差异,结果发现腹腔镜组较开腹组术中出血量更少、术后并发症发生率更低、住院时间更短。

对于再次肝切除患者,处理前次手术造成的粘连是重要的技术挑战之一。精细的操作有利于减少出血和防止肠道损伤,从而降低术后病发率的产生。腹腔镜放大效应使分离更加精细,气腹使粘连腹壁具有一定的张力,更容易分离,且分离粘连能避免非手术区操作,从而使出血量减少[15, 20]。近年来高清光学技术的发展,提高了腹腔镜视野分辨率,增强了重要结构的识别精确性。如三维重建、腔镜超声、荧光腹腔镜使得腹腔镜肝切除更精准,在保证足够切缘的前提下提高了腹腔镜肝切除的安全性[21-22]

本研究仍有一些缺陷:(1)为单中心、非随机的回顾性研究,未能排除二次手术,肿瘤大小、数量和位置,患者情况,医生主观选择等对术式选择的影响。虽然经过倾向匹配评分,仍不能消除这些偏倚;(2)样本量较小,且匹配后多为单发肿瘤,而肝转移常为多发。

综上所述,本研究显示,腹腔镜再次肝切除操作较开腹更精细,能减少不必要的粘连分离和由此引起的损伤,进而减少术中出血、术后并发症,提示腹腔镜治疗特定的复发性肠癌肝转移有一定的优势。后期仍须联合多中心,积累样本量,尤其须增加腹腔镜组多发肿瘤的病例,并进行更严谨的匹配以进一步消除差异,进而更好地指导临床。

利益冲突:所有作者声明不存在利益冲突。

参考文献
[1]
ROBLES-CAMPOS R, LOPEZ-LOPEZ V, BRUSADIN R, et al. Open versus minimally invasive liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases (LapOpHuva): a prospective randomized controlled trial[J]. Surg Endosc, 2019, 33(12): 3926-3936. [DOI]
[2]
WAKABAYASHI G, CHERQUI D, GELLER D A, et al. Laparoscopic hepatectomy is theoretically better than open hepatectomy: preparing for the 2nd International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resection[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014, 21(10): 723-731. [DOI]
[3]
OKUNO M, GOUMARD C, MIZUNO T, et al. Operative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases located in the posterosuperior liver: a propensity score matching analysis[J]. Surg Endosc, 2018, 32(4): 1776-1786. [DOI]
[4]
HAN H S, SHEHTA A, AHN S, et al. Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: case-matched study with propensity score matching[J]. J Hepatol, 2015, 63(3): 643-650. [DOI]
[5]
LEE W, PARK J H, KIM J Y, et al. Comparison of perioperative and oncologic outcomes between open and laparoscopic liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Surg Endosc, 2016, 30(11): 4835-4840. [DOI]
[6]
WATANABE T, ITABASHI M, SHIMADA Y, et al. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2014 for treatment of colorectal cancer[J]. Int J Clin Oncol, 2015, 20(2): 207-239. [DOI]
[7]
TSALIS K, IOANNIDIS O, CHEVA A, et al. A 20-year single center experience in the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastasis[J]. J BUON, 2018, 23(6): 1640-1647.
[8]
林奇, 周鹏扬, 庄奥博, 等. 同时性结直肠癌原发灶和肝转移灶中KRAS基因突变的一致性分析[J]. 中国临床医学, 2019, 26(4): 549-554.
LIN Q, ZHOU P Y, ZHUANG A B, et al. Consistency analysis of KRAS mutation between primary tumors and paired liver metastases in synchronous colorectal live metastasis[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2019, 26(4): 549-554. [URI]
[9]
HALLS M C, CHERQUI D, TAYLOR M A, et al. Are the current difficulty scores for laparoscopic liver surgery telling the whole story? An international survey and recommendations for the future[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2018, 20(3): 231-236. [DOI]
[10]
HALLS M C, CIPRIANI F, BERARDI G, et al. Conversion for unfavorable intraoperative events results in significantly worse outcomes during laparoscopic liver resection: lessons learned from a multicenter review of 2861 cases[J]. Ann Surg, 2018, 268(6): 1051-1057. [DOI]
[11]
XU J, FAN J, QIN X, et al. Chinese guidelines for the diagnosis and comprehensive treatment of colorectal liver metastases (version 2018)[J]. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2019, 145(3): 725-736. [DOI]
[12]
BRUDVIK K W, MISE Y, CONRAD C, et al. Definition of readmission in 3, 041 patients undergoing hepatectomy[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2015, 221(1): 38-46. [DOI]
[13]
TAKAHARA T, WAKABAYASHI G, BEPPU T, et al. Long-term and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with propensity score matching: a multi-institutional Japanese study[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2015, 22(10): 721-727. [DOI]
[14]
BEPPU T, WAKABAYASHI G, HASEGAWA K, et al. Long-term and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases with propensity score matching: a multi-institutional Japanese study[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2015, 22(10): 711-720. [DOI]
[15]
MORISE Z. Status and perspective of laparoscopic repeat liver resection[J]. World J Hepatol, 2018, 10(7): 479-484. [DOI]
[16]
KANAZAWA A, TSUKAMOTO T, SHIMIZU S, et al. Laparoscopic liver resection for treating recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2013, 20(5): 512-517. [DOI]
[17]
HWANG E S, WANG X. Value of propensity score matching to study surgical outcomes[J]. Ann Surg, 2017, 265(3): 457-458. [DOI]
[18]
AMELUNG F J, BORSTLAP W A A, CONSTEN E C J, et al. Propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcome between stent as bridge to surgery and emergency resection in patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction[J]. Br J Surg, 2019, 106(8): 1075-1086. [DOI]
[19]
HALLET J, SA CUNHA A, CHERQUI D, et al. Laparoscopic compared to open repeat hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases: a multi-institutional propensity-matched analysis of short- and long-term outcomes[J]. World J Surg, 2017, 41(12): 3189-3198. [DOI]
[20]
MORISE Z, CIRIA R, CHERQUI D, et al. Can we expand the indications for laparoscopic liver resection? A systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and chronic liver disease[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2015, 22(5): 342-352. [DOI]
[21]
王晓颖, 高强, 朱晓东, 等. 吲哚菁绿荧光引导腹腔镜解剖性Ⅷ段切除流程[J]. 中华肝胆外科杂志, 2019, 25(5): 384-385.
WANG X Y, GAO Q, ZHU X D, et al. Process of ICG fluorescent guided laparoscopic anatomical Ⅷ resection[J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery, 2019, 25(5): 384-385. [DOI]
[22]
王晓颖, 高强, 朱晓东, 等. 腹腔镜超声联合三维可视化技术引导门静脉穿刺吲哚菁绿荧光染色在精准解剖性肝段切除术中的应用[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2018(5): 452-458.
WANG X Y, GAO Q, ZHU X D, et al. Application of ICG fluorescence staining by laparoscopic ultrasound and 3D visualization guided portal branch puncture approach in anatomical segmentectomy[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestive Surgery, 2018(5): 452-458. [DOI]

文章信息

引用本文
朱凯, 宋丹军, 周俭, 樊嘉, 王晓颖. 腹腔镜与开腹再次肝切除治疗复发性肠癌肝转移患者的术后短期预后比较[J]. 中国临床医学, 2021, 28(5): 813-817.
ZHU Kai, SONG Dan-jun, ZHOU Jian, FAN Jia, WANG Xiao-ying. Short term postoperative prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis after laparoscopic versus open repeat liver resection[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2021, 28(5): 813-817.
通信作者(Corresponding authors).
王晓颖, Tel: 021-64041990, E-mail: xiaoyingwang@fudan.edu.cn.
基金项目
国家自然科学基金(81830102,81772578,81572367,81772556),国家重点研发计划(2019YFC1315800,2019YFC1315802),上海市自然科学基金(21ZR1413800),上海市卫生健康委员会项目(201840161)
Foundation item
Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China(81830102, 81772578, 81572367, 81772556), National Key R & D Program of China (2019YFC1315800, 2019YFC1315802), Natural Science Fundation of Shanghai (21ZR1413800), and Shanghai Municipal Key Clinical Specialty(201840161)

工作空间