Frontiers in surgery · 2026
Clinical study on the efficacy comparison between ileotransverse colon overlap anastomosis and π-shaped anastomosis in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fangxin Wan, Bin Liu, Haocheng Zhang, Baoyu Li
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of ileotransverse colon Overlap and π-shaped anastomosis in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy (LRRH).
METHODS: A prospective RCT enrolled 120 right colon cancer patients (Dec 2022-Dec 2024) randomized to Overlap (n = 60) or π-shaped (n = 60) group. Perioperative indicators, inflammatory/nutritional markers, gastrointestinal function recovery, 30-day complications (clinical anastomotic leakage, Clavien-Dindo ≥ II) and hospital stay were compared.
RESULTS: No significant preoperative baseline differences were found between groups (P > 0.05). The Overlap group had shorter anastomosis/operative time, milder postoperative inflammation, faster nutritional/gastrointestinal recovery, and earlier liquid diet tolerance (all P < 0.01). Clinical anastomotic leakage incidence showed no intergroup difference (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Overlap anastomosis is a preferable reconstruction method for LRRH, with advantages in short-term recovery. However, this study failed to demonstrate its superiority in reducing clinical anastomotic leakage due to limited sample size and statistical power, and results should be interpreted with caution.
METHODS: A prospective RCT enrolled 120 right colon cancer patients (Dec 2022-Dec 2024) randomized to Overlap (n = 60) or π-shaped (n = 60) group. Perioperative indicators, inflammatory/nutritional markers, gastrointestinal function recovery, 30-day complications (clinical anastomotic leakage, Clavien-Dindo ≥ II) and hospital stay were compared.
RESULTS: No significant preoperative baseline differences were found between groups (P > 0.05). The Overlap group had shorter anastomosis/operative time, milder postoperative inflammation, faster nutritional/gastrointestinal recovery, and earlier liquid diet tolerance (all P < 0.01). Clinical anastomotic leakage incidence showed no intergroup difference (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Overlap anastomosis is a preferable reconstruction method for LRRH, with advantages in short-term recovery. However, this study failed to demonstrate its superiority in reducing clinical anastomotic leakage due to limited sample size and statistical power, and results should be interpreted with caution.