切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志

中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (01) : 21 -26. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3232.2024.01.005

临床研究

鞘外法和鞘内法Glisson蒂阻断在腹腔镜解剖性肝切除中应用的对比研究
洪汉崟, 陈志坚, 池小斌, 陈剑伟, 俞建达, 陈永标†()   
  1. 350025　福州，福建医科大学福总临床医学院
    350025　福州，第九○○医院肝胆外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-11-01 出版日期:2024-02-10
  • 通信作者: 陈永标
  • 基金资助:
    福建省自然科学基金面上项目(2021J011265)

Comparative study of extrathecal and intrathecal Glisson's pedicle transection in laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy

Hanyin Hong, Zhijian Chen, Xiaobin Chi, Jianwei Chen, Jianda Yu, Yongbiao Chen†()   

  1. School of Clinical Medicine, Fuzhou General Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou 350025, China
    Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the 900th Hospital, Fuzhou 350025, China
  • Received:2023-11-01 Published:2024-02-10
  • Corresponding author: Yongbiao Chen
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

洪汉崟, 陈志坚, 池小斌, 陈剑伟, 俞建达, 陈永标. 鞘外法和鞘内法Glisson蒂阻断在腹腔镜解剖性肝切除中应用的对比研究[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 21-26.

Hanyin Hong, Zhijian Chen, Xiaobin Chi, Jianwei Chen, Jianda Yu, Yongbiao Chen. Comparative study of extrathecal and intrathecal Glisson's pedicle transection in laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy[J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 13(01): 21-26.

目的

比较鞘外法和鞘内法Glisson蒂阻断在腹腔镜解剖性肝切除中的安全性及疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2019年1月至2022年6月在第九○○医院行腹腔镜解剖性肝切除的192例患者临床资料。患者均签署知情同意书，符合医学伦理学规定。其中男110例，女82例；年龄17～81岁，中位年龄56岁。原发性肝癌（肝癌）96例，其他恶性肿瘤及良性疾病96例。根据Glisson蒂处理方法不同，将患者分为鞘外解剖Glisson蒂（鞘外组，65例）和鞘内解剖Glisson蒂（鞘内组，127例）。观察两组围手术期情况、术后并发症和术后生存复发情况。两组手术时间、术后住院时间比较采用t检验或秩和检验，率的比较采用χ2检验，生存分析采用Kaplan-Meier法和Log-rank检验。

结果

两组患者均手术顺利，均无围手术期死亡。鞘外组平均手术时间、肝蒂处理时间分别为（212±79）、（18±5）min，明显短于鞘内组的（236±68）、（21±5）min（t=-2.097，-3.927；P<0.05）。鞘外组和鞘内组术后并发症发生率分别为7.6%（5/65）、6.3%（8/127），差异均无统计学意义（χ2=0.132，P>0.05）；两组术后住院时间分别为12（10，13）、11（8，14）d，差异亦无统计学意义（Z=1.626，P>0.05）。96例肝癌患者均获得术后随访，随访时间1～42个月，中位随访时间28个月。两组术后总体生存率和无瘤生存率比较差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.894，0.154；P>0.05）。

结论

鞘外法和鞘内法Glisson蒂阻断在腹腔镜解剖性肝切除中均可行且安全，肿瘤学获益方面无明显差异，但鞘外法Glisson蒂阻断可提升手术效率。

关键词: Glisson蒂, 鞘外法, 鞘内法, 腹腔镜, 肝切除术, Laennec膜间隙
Objective

To compare the safety and efficacy of extrathecal and intrathecal transection of Glisson's pedicle in laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy.

Methods

Clinical data of 192 patients who underwent laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy in the 900th Hospital from January 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The informed consents of all patients were obtained and the local ethical committee approval was received. Among them, 110 patients were male, 82 female, aged from 17 to 81 years, with a median age of 56 years. 96 patients were diagnosed with primary liver cancer (PLC), 96 cases of other malignant tumors and benign diseases. According to different treatment methods of Glisson's pedicle, all patients were divided into extrathecal anatomical Glisson pedicle (extrathecal group, n=65) and intrathecal anatomical Glisson pedicle (intrathecal group, n=127). Perioperative conditions, postoperative complications and postoperative survival and recurrence were observed in two groups. The operation time and postoperative length of hospital stay between two groups were compared by t test or rank-sum test. The rate comparison was conducted by Chi-square test. Survival analysis was performed by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Log-rank test.

Results

All patients successfully underwent surgery in two groups and no perioperative death was reported. In the extrathecal group, the mean operation time and pedicle treatment time were (212±79) and (18±5) min, which were significantly shorter than (236±68) and (21±5) min in the intrathecal group (t=-2.097, -3.927; P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was 7.6%(5/65) and 6.3%(8/127) in the extrathecal and intrathecal groups, and no significant difference was found between two groups (χ2=0.132, P>0.05). Postoperative length of hospital stay in two groups was 12(10, 13) and 11(8, 14) d, and no significant difference was found (Z=1.626, P>0.05). All 96 PLC patients were followed up for1-42 months, with a median follow-up of 28 months. No significant difference was observed in overall survival and tumor-free survival between two groups (χ2=0.894, 0.154; P>0.05).

Conclusions

Both extrathecal and intrathecal Glisson's pedicle transection are feasible and safe in laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy. No significant difference is noted in oncology benefits between two procedures. However, extrathecal transection of Glisson's pedicle can improve surgical efficiency.

Key words: Glisson pedicle, Extrathecal approach, Intrathecal approach, Laparoscopes, Hepatectomy, Laennec's capsule
图1 肝切除术中肝蒂解剖注：a为鞘外解剖右前叶肝蒂，b为鞘外解剖左肝蒂，c为鞘内解剖门静脉右支
表1 鞘外组和鞘内组腹腔镜解剖性肝切除术患者术前一般资料比较
组别 例数 性别（例） 年龄（岁，±s） BMI（kg/m2，±s） ALB（g/L，±s） ALT[U/L，M（Q1，Q3）] AST[U/L，M（Q1，Q3）] TB[mmol/L，M（Q1，Q3）]
男 女
鞘外组 65 40 25 56±13 24±3 43±3 24（18，29） 23（18，26） 11（8，16）
鞘内组 127 70 57 55±12 23±3 42±4 22（15，36） 22（16，32） 11（8，15）
统计值   χ2=0.724 t=0.713 t=1.270 t=1.296 Z=0.073 Z=0.500 Z=0.307
P值   0.395 0.477 0.206 0.196 0.942 0.617 0.759
组别 例数 PT[s，M（Q1，Q3）] DSS-ER（例） 病理类型(例)
低难度 中等难度 高难度 肝癌 其他类型恶性肿瘤 良性疾病
鞘外组 65 11（11，12） 22 12 31 36 3 26
鞘内组 127 12（11，12） 39 30 58 60 12 55
统计值   Z=-1.835 χ2=0.695 χ2=1.967
P值   0.066 0.707 0.374
表2 鞘外组和鞘内组腹腔镜解剖性肝切除术患者围手术期指标比较
组别 例数 手术时间（min，±s） 肝蒂处理时间（min，±s） 阻断时间[min，M（Q1，Q3）] 术中出血量[ml, M（Q1，Q3）] 术中输血（例） 术后并发症（例） 术后住院时间[d，M（Q1，Q3）]
鞘外组 65 212±79 18±5 30（20, 45） 150（100, 400） 10 5 12（10, 13）
鞘内组 127 236±68 21±5 27（20, 35） 200（150, 400） 15 8 11（8, 14）
统计值   t=-2.097 t=-3.927 Z=1.530 Z=-1.438 χ2=0.485 χ2=0.132 Z=1.626
P值   0.038 0.000 0.126 0.150 0.486 0.716 0.104
组别 例数 术后ALB（g/L，±s） 术后ALT[U/L，M（Q1，Q3）] 术后AST[U/L，M（Q1，Q3）] TB[mmol/L，M（Q1，Q3）] PT[s，M（Q1，Q3）]
鞘外组 65 37.4±3.0 46（35, 69） 29（22, 37） 15（11, 19） 12（11, 12）
鞘内组 127 37.6±3.1 45（29, 77） 29（22, 49） 16（13, 19） 12 （11, 13）
统计值   t=-0.456 Z=0.704 Z=0.660 Z=-1.249 Z=0.032
P值   0.649 0.481 0.509 0.212 0.975
图2 鞘外组和鞘内组肝癌患者腹腔镜解剖性肝切除术后Kaplan-Meier生存曲线
[1]
Couinaud CM. A simplified method for controlled left hepatectomy[J]. Surgery, 1985, 97(3):358-361.
[2]
Takasaki K. Hepatic resection using glissonean pedicle transection[J]. Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi, 1998, 99(4):245-250.
[3]
Takasaki K, Kobayashi S, Tanaka S, et al. Highly anatomically systematized hepatic resection with Glissonean sheath code transection at the hepatic hilus[J]. Int Surg, 1990, 75(2):73-77.
[4]
Takasaki K. Glissonean pedicle transection method for hepatic resection: a new concept of liver segmentation[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, 1998, 5(3):286-291.
[5]
Ciria R, Cherqui D, Geller DA, et al. Comparative short-term benefits of laparoscopic liver resection: 9000 cases and climbing[J]. Ann Surg, 2016, 263(4):761-777.
[6]
Jiang B, Yan XF, Zhang JH. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Hepatol Res, 2018, 48(8):635-663.
[7]
Sugioka A, Kato Y, Tanahashi Y. Systematic extrahepatic Glissonean pedicle isolation for anatomical liver resection based on Laennec's capsule: proposal of a novel comprehensive surgical anatomy of the liver[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2017, 24(1):17-23.
[8]
Kawaguchi Y, Fuks D, Kokudo N, et al. Difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection: proposal for a new classification[J]. Ann Surg, 2018, 267(1):13-17.
[9]
Halls MC, 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.
[10]
Cai X. Laparoscopic liver resection: the current status and the future[J]. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr, 2018, 7(2):98-104.
[11]
Makuuchi M, Mori T, Gunvén P, et al. Safety of hemihepatic vascular occlusion during resection of the liver[J]. Surg Gynecol Obstet, 1987, 164(2):155-158.
[12]
Jiao S, Li G, Zhang D, et al. Anatomic versus non-anatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma, do we have an answer? a meta-analysis[J]. Int J Surg, 2020(80):243-255.
[13]
Moris D, Tsilimigras DI, Kostakis ID, et al. Anatomic versus non-anatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2018, 44(7):927-938.
[14]
Shindoh J, Makuuchi M, Matsuyama Y, et al. Complete removal of the tumor-bearing portal territory decreases local tumor recurrence and improves disease-specific survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2016, 64(3):594-600.
[15]
李斌, 姜小清. 重视"门短静脉"解剖在围肝门手术中的意义[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2019, 39(2):145-148.
[16]
Yamamoto M, Katagiri S, Ariizumi S, et al. Glissonean pedicle transection method for liver surgery (with video)[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2012, 19(1):3-8.
[17]
Xie KL, Zeng Y, Wu H. Hepatic trisectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma using the Glisson pedicle method combined with anterior approach[J]. World J Surg, 2014, 38(9):2358-2362.
[18]
曹君, 王宏光, 梁霄, 等. 门静脉流域解剖性肝切除治疗肝细胞癌的理论与技术实践[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2022, 21(5):591-597.
[19]
曹君, 陈亚进. 浅谈腹腔镜肝切除之入路[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2019, 57(7):503-507.
[20]
余钒, 郑树国, 李建伟, 等. Glisson蒂横断式腹腔镜解剖性肝切除术的临床疗效[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2015, 14(4):305-309.
[21]
Cheng YF, Huang TL, Chen CL, et al. Anatomic dissociation between the intrahepatic bile duct and portal vein: risk factors for left hepatectomy[J]. World J Surg, 1997, 21(3):297-300.
[22]
Makdissi FF, de Mattos BVH, Kruger JAP, et al. A combined "hanging liver maneuver" and "intrahepatic extra-Glissonian approach" for anatomical right hepatectomy: technique standardization, results, and correlation with portal pedicle anatomy[J]. Front Surg, 2021(8):690408.
[23]
Fang C, An J, Bruno A, et al. Consensus recommendations of three-dimensional visualization for diagnosis and management of liver diseases[J]. Hepatol Int, 2020, 14(4):437-453.
[24]
中华医学会外科学分会肝脏外科学组. 腹腔镜肝切除术专家共识和手术操作指南(2013版)[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2013, 51(4):289-292.
[25]
周佳, 彭创, 刘苏来, 等. 肝蒂优先背侧入路腹腔镜解剖性肝Ⅶ段切除7例[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2022, 37(1):59-61.
[26]
尤楠, 李靖, 郑璐. 肝实质优先入路的腹腔镜解剖性肝切除技术及应用[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2020, 29(7):775-784.
[27]
彭建新, 何军明, 方扬. 肝实质优先腹腔镜解剖性肝中叶切除术的应用体会[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2021, 26(11):826-829.
[28]
Liu TS, Shen QH, Zhou XY, et al. Application of controlled low central venous pressure during hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Clin Anesth, 2021, 75:110467.
[29]
Ichida H, Ishizawa T, Tanaka M, et al. Use of intercostal trocars for laparoscopic resection of subphrenic hepatic tumors[J]. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31(3):1280-1286.
[30]
Lee W, Han HS, Yoon YS, et al. Role of intercostal trocars on laparoscopic liver resection for tumors in segments 7 and 8[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2014, 21(8):E65-68.
[1] 杜晓辉, 崔建新. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术淋巴结清扫范围与策略[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 5-8.
[2] 周岩冰, 刘晓东. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术消化道吻合重建方式的选择[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 9-13.
[3] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[4] 王春荣, 陈姜, 喻晨. 循Glisson蒂鞘外解剖、Laennec膜入路腹腔镜解剖性左半肝切除术临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 37-40.
[5] 李凯, 陈淋, 向涵, 苏怀东, 张伟. 一种U型记忆合金线在经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 15-15.
[6] 李晓玉, 江庆, 汤海琴, 罗静枝. 围手术期综合管理对胆总管结石并急性胆管炎患者ERCP +LC术后心肌损伤的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 57-60.
[7] 甄子铂, 刘金虎. 基于列线图模型探究静脉全身麻醉腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术后肠道功能紊乱的影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 61-65.
[8] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[9] 曹迪, 张玉茹. 经腹腔镜生物补片修补直肠癌根治术后盆底疝1例[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 115-116.
[10] 马楠, 杨振宇, 林旭曼, 刘振华, 陈贤达, 郭胜杰, 韩辉, 周芳坚, 刘卓炜, 尧凯. 免气腹单孔后腹腔镜肾上腺肿瘤切除术初步探讨[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-30.
[11] 谢华栋, 曾四平, 张世玉, 赵起越, 熊燕祥, 管刚云, 蒙勇燕, 詹谊. 腹腔镜膀胱肌瓣输尿管成形术治疗输尿管阴道瘘的疗效[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 46-51.
[12] 李腾成, 黄群雄, 胡成, 肖恒军, 徐锦斌, 高舜天, 黄展森, 高新, 狄金明. 机器人腹腔镜后入路筋膜内和筋膜外根治性前列腺切除术技术分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 12-18.
[13] 任磊, 张瑞敏, 赵永祥. 隐睾患儿病因分析及临床诊疗进展[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 100-104.
[14] 张占国. 靶向免疫治疗时代的肝癌肝切除术再思考[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 11-15.
[15] 王晓栋, 蔡凤军, 白燕萍, 杨永生. ICG荧光导航在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中应用的关键问题探讨[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 16-20.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号