Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023
Laparoscopic versus open surgery for gallbladder carcinoma: safety, feasibility, and oncological outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Wu Xin, Li Binglu, Zheng Chaoji, Liu Wei, Hong Tao, He Xiaodong
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gallbladder carcinoma (GC) is a rare malignant tumor. Laparoscopic technology has revolutionized the reality of surgery. However, whether laparoscopic surgery is suitable for GC has not been clarified. We aimed to analyze the safety, feasibility, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in GC.
METHODS: The medical records of patients with GC treated at our hospital between January 2016 and December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent laparoscopic and open surgery were compared. Propensity score matched analysis was performed to balance the basic characteristics of the two groups. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to describe and compare the overall and disease-free survival rates between the groups.
RESULTS: A total of 163 patients with GC were included. Cholelithiasis was detected in 64 (39.3%) patients. Seventy patients were matched after propensity score matching. The laparoscopic group was significantly better than the open group in terms of operation time (p < 0.001), blood loss (p = 0.002), drain time (p = 0.001), and hospital stay (p < 0.001). After a median follow-up time of 19 (12, 35) months, there was no significant difference in the cumulative overall (p = 0.650) and disease-free (p = 0.663) survival rates between the laparoscopic and open groups according to Kaplan-Meier curves.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery can reduce the operation time and blood loss, and shorten drain time and hospital stay without increasing the incidence of complications. Patients undergoing laparoscopic and open surgery have a similar prognosis. Laparoscopic surgery is worth promoting in patients with GC.
METHODS: The medical records of patients with GC treated at our hospital between January 2016 and December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent laparoscopic and open surgery were compared. Propensity score matched analysis was performed to balance the basic characteristics of the two groups. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to describe and compare the overall and disease-free survival rates between the groups.
RESULTS: A total of 163 patients with GC were included. Cholelithiasis was detected in 64 (39.3%) patients. Seventy patients were matched after propensity score matching. The laparoscopic group was significantly better than the open group in terms of operation time (p < 0.001), blood loss (p = 0.002), drain time (p = 0.001), and hospital stay (p < 0.001). After a median follow-up time of 19 (12, 35) months, there was no significant difference in the cumulative overall (p = 0.650) and disease-free (p = 0.663) survival rates between the laparoscopic and open groups according to Kaplan-Meier curves.
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery can reduce the operation time and blood loss, and shorten drain time and hospital stay without increasing the incidence of complications. Patients undergoing laparoscopic and open surgery have a similar prognosis. Laparoscopic surgery is worth promoting in patients with GC.