|
|
|
题名
|
作者
|
年代
|
出处
|
被引量
|
| 1 | Robot-assisted laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy for gastric cancer:Systematic review and meta-analysis显示文摘AIM To evaluate the potential effectiveness of robot-assisted gastrectomy(RAG) in comparison to open gastrectomy(OG) for gastric cancer patients.METHODS A comprehensive systematic literature search using PubM ed,EMBASE,and the Cochrane Library was carried out to identify studies comparing RAG and OG in gastric cancer.Participants of any age and sex were considered for inclusion in comparative studies of the two techniques independently from type of gastrectomy.A meta-analysis of short-term perioperative outcomes was performed to evaluate whether RAG is equivalent to OG.The primary outcome measures were set for estimated blood loss,operative time,conversion rate,morbidity,and hospital stay.Secondary among postoperative complications,wound infection,bleeding and anastomotic leakage were also analysed.RESULTS A total of 6 articles,5 retrospective and 1 randomized controlled study,involving 6123 patients overall,with 689(11.3%) cases submitted to RAG and 5434(88.7%) to OG,satisfied the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis.RAG was associated with longer operation time than OG(weighted mean difference 72.20 min;P < 0.001),but with reduction in blood loss and shorter hospital stay(weighted mean difference-166.83 mL and-1.97 d respectively;P < 0.001).No differences were found with respect to overall postoperative complications(P = 0.65),wound infection(P = 0.35),bleeding(P = 0.65),and anastomotic leakage(P = 0.06).The postoperative mortality rates were similar between the two groups.With respect to oncological outcomes,no statistical differences among the number of harvested lymph nodes were found(weighted mean difference-1.12;P = 0.10).CONCLUSION RAG seems to be a technically valid alternative to OG for performing radical gastrectomy in gastric cancer resulting in safe complications. | Stefano Caruso Alberto Patriti Franco Roviello Lorenzo De Franco Franco Franceschini Graziano Ceccarelli Andrea Coratti | 2017 | World Journal of Clinical Oncology2017，8，3： | 23 |
| 2 | Laparoscopic and robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current considerations显示文摘Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymph-adenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer(GC). A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase Ⅲ evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage GC. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage GC, especially in Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Some intrinsic drawbacks of the conventional laparoscopic technique have prevented the worldwide spread of laparoscopic gastrectomyfor cancer and, despite technological advances in recent year, it remains a technically challenging procedure. The introduction of robotic surgery over the last ten years has implied a notable mutation of certain minimally invasive procedures, making it possible to overcome some limitations of the traditional laparoscopic technique. Robot-assisted gastric resection with D2 lymph node dissection has been shown to be safe and feasible in prospective and retrospective studies. However, to date there are no high quality comparative studies investigating the advantages of a robotic approach to GC over traditional laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. On the basis of the literature review here presented, robot-assisted surgery seems to fulfill oncologic criteria for D2 dissection and has a comparable oncologic outcome to traditional laparoscopic and open procedure. Robot-assisted gastrectomy was associated with the trend toward a shorter hospital stay with a comparable morbidity of conventional laparoscopic and open gastrectomy, but randomized clinical trials and longer follow-ups are needed to evaluate the possible influence of robot gastrectomy on GC patient survival. | Stefano Caruso Alberto Patriti Franco Roviello Lorenzo De Franco Franco Franceschini Andrea Coratti Graziano Ceccarelli | 2016 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2016，22，25： | 23 |
| 3 | Robot-assisted laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer显示文摘Phase Ⅲ evidence in the shape of a series of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses has shown that laparoscopic gastrectomy is safe and gives better short-term results with respect to the traditional open technique for early-stage gastric cancer. In fact, in the East laparoscopic gastrectomy has become routine for early-stage gastric cancer. In contrast, the treatment of advanced gastric cancer through a minimally invasive way is still a debated issue, mostly due to worries about its oncological efficacy and the difficulty of carrying out an extended lymphadenectomy and intestinal reconstruction after total gastrectomy laparoscopically. Over the last ten years the introduction of robotic surgery has implied overcoming some intrinsic drawbacks found to be present in the conventional laparoscopic procedure. Robotassisted gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy has been shown to be safe and feasible for the treatment of gastric cancer patients. But unfortunately, most available studies investigating the robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer compared to laparoscopic and open technique are so far retrospective and there have not been phase Ⅲ trials. In the present review we looked at scientific evidence available today regarding the new high-tech surgical robotic approach, and we attempted to bring to light the real advantages of robot-assisted gastrectomy compared to the traditional laparoscopic and open technique for the treatment of gastric cancer. | Stefano Caruso Franco Franceschini Alberto Patriti Franco Roviello Mario Annecchiarico Graziano Ceccarelli Andrea Coratti | 2017 | World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy2017，9，1： | 4 |
| 4 | Inflammation impairs eNOS activation by HDL in patients with acute coronary syndrome显示文摘 | Monica Gomaraschi Alice Ossoli Elda Favari Maria Pia Adorni Gianfranco Sinagra Luigi Cattin Fabrizio Veglia Franco Bernini Guido Franceschini Laura Calabresi | 2013 | Cardiovascular Research2013，，1： | 1 |
| 5 | New translational and experimental insights into the role of proresolving lipid mediators in inflammatory bowel disease显示文摘The resolution of inflammation is an active process,guided by specialized proresolution lipid mediators(SPMs).These mediators originate from polyunsaturated fatty acids,such as omega-3.Sufficient evidence suggests that the beneficial effects attributed to omega-3 are,at least in part,the result of the immunomodulatory action of the SPMs,which act systemically by overcoming inflammation and repairing tissue damage,without suppressing the immune response.Recent studies suggest that an imbalance in the synthesis and/or activity of these compounds may be associated with the pathogenesis of several inflammatory conditions,such as inflammatory bowel disease(IBD).Thus,this review highlights the advances made in recent years with regard to the endogenous synthesis and the biological role of lipoxins,resolvins,protectins,and maresins,as well as their precursors,in the regulation of inflammation;and provides an update on the participation of these mediators in the development and evolution of IBD and the therapeutic approaches that these immunomodulating substances are involved in this context. | Lívia Bitencourt Pascoal Bruna Biazon Palma Fabio Henrique Mendonça Chaim Marina Moreira de Castro Tiago Andrade Damázio Ana Paula Menezes de Freitas Franceschini Marciane Milanski Lício AugustoVelloso Raquel Franco Leal | 2022 | World Journal of Experimental Medicine2022，12，1： | 0 |
| 6 | 免疫疗法联合立体定向放疗治疗非小细胞肺癌脑转移:一项AIRO多中心回顾性研究显示文摘背景与目的 通过意大利放射治疗和临床肿瘤学学会(Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology, AIRO)的一项多中心回顾性研究,明确免疫疗法(immunotherapy, IT)和立体定向放疗(stereotactic radiotherapy,SRT)包括放射外科治疗(radiosurgery, RS)或大分割立体定向放疗(hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, HFSRT)治疗非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC)脑转移的疗效和毒性。方法 对来自19个意大利中心接受SRT+IT的NSCLC伴脑转移患者进行分析,并与单独接受SRT的对照组患者进行比较。结果 共纳入SRT+IT组100例和单独SRT组50例。接受SRT+IT的患者有更长的颅内局部无进展生存期(intracranial local progression-free survival, i LPFS)(经倾向性评分调整后,P=0.007)。在诊断为脑转移时接受IT合并有颅外进展的患者中(n=24),接受SRT后再进行IT与较好的总生存期(overall survival, OS)相关(P=0.037)。多因素分析显示组织学类型为非腺癌、卡氏体能状态(Karnofsky performance status,KPS)评分=70分以及接受HFSRT与显著减少的生存期相关(P值分别为0.019、0.017和0.007)。与SRT和IT治疗间隔>7天(n=10)相比,治疗间隔≤7天(n=90)与更长的OS相关(经倾向性评分调整后,P=0.008)。联合治疗耐受性良好。在放射性坏死方面,接受SRT+IT的患者与单独SRT的患者无显著差异。SRT和IT的治疗间隔对毒性发生率无影响。结论 SRT+IT是一种安全的联合治疗方法,与单独SRT相比,具有更长的i LPFS。 | Silvia SCOCCIANTI Emanuela OLMETTO Valentina PINZI Mattia Falchetto OSTI Rossella Di FRANCO Saverio CAINI Paola ANSELMO Paolo MATTEUCCI Davide FRANCESCHINI Cristina MANTOVANI Giancarlo BELTRAMO Francesco PASQUALETTI Alessio BRUNI Paolo TINI Emilia GIUDICE Patrizia CIAMMELLA Anna MERLOTTI Sara PEDRETTI Marianna TRIGNANI Marco KRENGLI NiccolòGIAJ-LEVRA Isacco DESIDERI Guido PECCHIOLI Paolo MUTO Ernesto MARANZANO Laura FARISELLI Pierina NAVARRIA Umberto RICARDI Vieri SCOTTI Lorenzo LIVI 王绿化(翻译/校对) | 2022 | 中国肺癌杂志2022，25，4： | 0 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员