Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Approach in Treating Gallbladder Cancer.


Journal

The Journal of surgical research
ISSN: 1095-8673
Titre abrégé: J Surg Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376340

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 2019
Historique:
received: 25 04 2018
revised: 27 06 2018
accepted: 11 09 2018
entrez: 12 12 2018
pubmed: 12 12 2018
medline: 15 11 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Preliminary study on the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and radical cholecystectomy in stage Tis-T3 gallbladder cancer (GBC). Retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 102 patients with GBC from August 2008 to August 2017 in the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. The clinical and pathological data of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery were compared. Of 102 patients with GBC, 41 underwent laparoscopic treatment, 12 of whom underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and the others underwent laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy/extended radical cholecystectomy. Sixty-one patients underwent radical cholecystectomy/extended radical cholecystectomy. Based on the individual patient's condition, excision of the extrahepatic biliary tract and cholangioenterostomy were performed. There were no perioperative deaths. There was no significant difference in the operative blood loss (P = 0.732), operative time (P = 0.058), postoperative complications (P = 0.933), R0 margins (P = 0.679), and tumor-related death (P = 0.396) between the laparoscopic group and the laparotomy group. The postoperative activity time (P < 0.001), postoperative eating time (P < 0.001), drainage tube removal time (P < 0.001), and postoperative hospital discharge time (P < 0.001) in the laparoscopic group were all earlier than those in the laparotomy group, and the difference was statistically significant. The number of lymph nodes resected in the laparoscopic group and the laparotomy group was 1-17, average (5 ± 3) and 1-13 average (5 ± 3), respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.973). The 1-, 3-, and 5-y survival rates in the laparoscopic group were 97.1%, 69.4%, and 51.9%, respectively, and those in the laparotomy group were 94.7%, 64.9%, and 55.7%, respectively; there were no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.453). In terms of different pathologic T stages, the 5-y survival rates of patients with stage Tis (9 cases), T1a (2 cases), T1b (8 cases), T2 (14 cases), and T3 (8 cases) disease in the laparoscopic group were 100%, 100%, 75%, 48.1%, and 12.5%, respectively, and the 5-y survival rates in patients with stage Tis (4 cases), T1b (9 cases), T2 (32 cases), and T3 (16 cases) disease in the laparotomy group were 100%, 87.5%, 64.7%, and 16%, respectively; there were no significant differences between the two groups. Laparoscopic treatment of stage Tis-T3 GBC is feasible. Laparoscopic treatment of GBC does not increase the incision metastasis rate on the basis of the intact gallbladder wall. The same survival rates can be achieved with laparoscopic treatment as with open treatment of GBC. In terms of postoperative rehabilitation, laparoscopic treatment has more advantages.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Preliminary study on the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and radical cholecystectomy in stage Tis-T3 gallbladder cancer (GBC).
METHODS
Retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 102 patients with GBC from August 2008 to August 2017 in the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. The clinical and pathological data of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery were compared.
RESULTS
Of 102 patients with GBC, 41 underwent laparoscopic treatment, 12 of whom underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and the others underwent laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy/extended radical cholecystectomy. Sixty-one patients underwent radical cholecystectomy/extended radical cholecystectomy. Based on the individual patient's condition, excision of the extrahepatic biliary tract and cholangioenterostomy were performed. There were no perioperative deaths. There was no significant difference in the operative blood loss (P = 0.732), operative time (P = 0.058), postoperative complications (P = 0.933), R0 margins (P = 0.679), and tumor-related death (P = 0.396) between the laparoscopic group and the laparotomy group. The postoperative activity time (P < 0.001), postoperative eating time (P < 0.001), drainage tube removal time (P < 0.001), and postoperative hospital discharge time (P < 0.001) in the laparoscopic group were all earlier than those in the laparotomy group, and the difference was statistically significant. The number of lymph nodes resected in the laparoscopic group and the laparotomy group was 1-17, average (5 ± 3) and 1-13 average (5 ± 3), respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.973). The 1-, 3-, and 5-y survival rates in the laparoscopic group were 97.1%, 69.4%, and 51.9%, respectively, and those in the laparotomy group were 94.7%, 64.9%, and 55.7%, respectively; there were no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.453). In terms of different pathologic T stages, the 5-y survival rates of patients with stage Tis (9 cases), T1a (2 cases), T1b (8 cases), T2 (14 cases), and T3 (8 cases) disease in the laparoscopic group were 100%, 100%, 75%, 48.1%, and 12.5%, respectively, and the 5-y survival rates in patients with stage Tis (4 cases), T1b (9 cases), T2 (32 cases), and T3 (16 cases) disease in the laparotomy group were 100%, 87.5%, 64.7%, and 16%, respectively; there were no significant differences between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic treatment of stage Tis-T3 GBC is feasible. Laparoscopic treatment of GBC does not increase the incision metastasis rate on the basis of the intact gallbladder wall. The same survival rates can be achieved with laparoscopic treatment as with open treatment of GBC. In terms of postoperative rehabilitation, laparoscopic treatment has more advantages.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30527484
pii: S0022-4804(18)30648-6
doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.09.025
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

269-276

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Jia-Wei Feng (JW)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.

Xing-Hai Yang (XH)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.

Chi-Wen Liu (CW)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.

Bao-Qiang Wu (BQ)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.

Dong-Lin Sun (DL)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.

Xue-Min Chen (XM)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.

Yong Jiang (Y)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China. Electronic address: yjiang8888@hotmail.com.

Zhen Qu (Z)

Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China. Electronic address: quzhen5014@126.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH