共被期刊论文引用了3次
您的检索式：您选中1篇文献正在查看引证文献汇总
|
|
|
题名
|
作者
|
年代
|
出处
|
被引量
|
| 1 | Surgical approach to right colon cancer:From open technique to robot.State of art显示文摘This work is a topic highlight on the surgical treatment of the right colon pathologies,focusing on the literature state of art and comparing the open surgery to the different laparoscopic and robotic procedures.Different laparoscopic procedures have been described for the treatment of right colon tumors: Totally laparoscopic right colectomy,laparoscopic assisted right colectomy,laparoscopic facilitated right colectomy,hand-assisted right colectomy,single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy,robotic right colectomy.Two main characteristics of these techniques are the different type of anastomosis: Intracorporeal(for totally laparoscopic right colectomy,single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy,laparoscopic assisted right colectomy and robotic technique) or extracorporeal(for laparoscopic assisted right colectomy,laparoscopic facilitated right colectomy,hand-assisted right colectomy and open right colectomy) and the different incision(suprapubic,median or transverse on the right side of abdomen).The different laparoscopic techniques meet the same oncological criteria of radicalism as the open surgery for the right colon.The totally laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis and even more the single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy,remain a technical challenge due to the complexity of procedures(especially for the single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy) and the particular right colon vascular anatomy but they seem to have some theoretical advantages compared to the other laparoscopic and open procedures.Data reported in literature while confirming the advantages of laparoscopic approach,do not allow to solve controversies about which is the best laparoscopic technique(Intracorporeal vs Extracorporeal Anastomosis) to treat the right colon cancer.However,the laparoscopic techniques with intracorporeal anastomosis for the right colon seem to show some theoretical advantages(functional,technical,oncological and cosmetic advantages) even if all studies conclude that further prospective randomized trials are necessary.Robotic technique may be useful to overcome the problems related to inexperience in laparoscopy in some surgical centers. | Massimiliano Fabozzi Pia Cirillo Francesco Corcione | 2016 | World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery2016，8，8： | 8 |
| 2 | 腹膜外结肠造口在腹腔镜直肠癌Miles术中的临床应用显示文摘为探讨腹膜外结肠造口在腹腔镜直肠癌Miles术中的应用价值,回顾我科于2007年6月至2013年6月完成的102例腹腔镜直肠癌Miles手术患者资料。根据肠造口方式不同分为观察组(腹膜外结肠造口组,57例)和对照组(腹膜内结肠造口组,45例),对比分析两组患者术后造口恢复情况。结果显示,观察组造口旁疝发生率(3.5%)明显低于对照组(17.8%),P〈0.05;两组造口回缩、造口狭窄、黏膜脱垂、造口坏死发生率比较差异均无统计学意义,P〉0.05。结果表明,腹膜外结肠造口可降低腹腔镜Miles术后造口旁疝的发生率,值得临床推广应用。 | 陈洪亮 李振军 陈志良 刘江 应晓江 | 2015 | 中国肛肠病杂志2015，0，2： | 1 |
| 3 | 结直肠手术中机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜手术效果的meta分析显示文摘目的:应用Meta分析的方法比较机器人和传统腹腔镜在结直肠手术应用中各项临床指标,以评价机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜治疗效果的安全性及差异。方法:本文在两个英文数据库:Pubmed和EMbase检索了建库至2012年1月关于机器人辅助腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜在结直肠手术中应用对比的文献,由两位不同的作者独立进行排除、纳入与数据提取,将符合标准的文献数据利用Stata10.0进行分析。结果:本文最终纳入了15篇符合标准的文献,共包含了1182个病人。总的机器人辅助手术并发症发生率为17%,中转开腹手术的转换率为2%,有死亡病例均为0。机器人辅助腹腔镜组手术时间比传统腹腔镜组长(SMD(标准化差值)=0.46,95%CI=0.29~0.63,P=0.001);手术花费比传统腹腔镜组高(SMD=1.12,95%CI=0.60~1.64,P<0.001)。在失血量,回收淋巴结个数,远端切口长度,肠功能恢复时间,饮食恢复时间,住院时间,手术花费,并发症发生的数目和转换到开腹手术的数目等指标上两者间无差异。结论:本研究表明机器人辅助手术在结直肠手术中的应用是安全有效的,但是需进一步降低其手术时间及费用。 | 邓军 童强 吴珂 卢晓明 王国斌 | 2012 | 临床急诊杂志2012，13，3： | 0 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员