肝硬化巨脾60例脾下极入路脾蒂控制术行全腔镜脾切除的应用分析

目的分析肝硬化巨脾患者脾下极入路脾蒂控制术行全腔镜脾切除的应用效果。方法选择2012年1月至2017年12月在本院接受治疗的60例肝硬化巨脾切除术患者进行研究。将所有患者根据不同的治疗方法分为两组,其中32例患者实施脾下极入路脾蒂控制术全腔镜脾切除术为观察组,其余28例患者实施常规腹腔镜脾切除术的为对照组。观察治疗后两组患者的术中情况和预后影响。结果观察组患者的手术时间明显短于对照组,术中出血量及中转开腹率明显少于对照组,两组比较有统计学意义(P0.05)。手术后观察组出现术后出血、胸腔积液、胰漏、食管瘘等各种并发症的患者明显少于对照组,观察组合计6.3%低于对照组28.6%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论脾下极入路脾蒂控制术行全腔镜脾切除术在肝硬化患者的应用具有较高安全性、疗效更加显著的优点,值得在临床上推广。     

腹腔镜脾脏切除经脾蒂上缘间隙离断脾蒂的疗效

目的探讨腹腔镜脾脏切除术中经脾蒂上缘间隙离断脾蒂的疗效。方法选择2011年2月至2019年2月本院收治的行腹腔镜脾脏切除术患者80例作为研究对象。按照随机数表法分为两组,各40例。观察组40例术中经脾蒂上缘间隙离断脾蒂术;对照组40例术中未经脾蒂上缘间隙离断脾蒂。比较两组术中出血量、中转开腹发生情况,手术时间、术后首次肛门排气、进食流质食物及术后住院时间、不良反应发生情况。结果观察组患者手术所用时间、出血量、中转开腹率均明显低于对照组(P0.05)。观察组首次肛门排气、进食流质食物、术后住院时间与对照组相比无明显差异(P0.05)。观察组并发症发生率明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜脾脏切除术中经脾蒂上缘间隙离断脾蒂的方法,能缩短手术时间,降低术中出血量和中转开腹率,缩短住院时间,减少并发症,值得推广应用。     

腹腔镜巨脾切除中转开腹手术原因分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜巨脾切除术中转开腹的原因及预防措施。方法:回顾分析2006年9月至2009年8月为38例巨脾患者施行腹腔镜脾脏手术的临床资料,其中8例中转开腹。结果:30例成功施行腹腔镜巨脾切除术,术中出血50～1200ml。8例中转开腹,主要原因为出血,器械因素,脾脏呈球形肿大,脾门如脐状凹陷,处理脾蒂困难及病程较长。结论:通过改进手术方式,术中仔细操作,中转开腹的某些因素是可避免的,能明显降低中转开腹率。绝大部分巨脾手术可通过腹腔镜手术完成。     

脾蒂先离断技术手助的腹腔镜脾切除与断流术30例

目的 总结脾蒂先离断技术行手助的腹腔镜脾切除与断流术的经验.方法 2006年8月至2012年9月,用脾蒂先离断技术完成手助腹腔镜巨脾切除30例.其中21例同时行贲门周围血管离断术.离断胃结肠韧带后,用伸入腹腔的手指分离脾蒂与其外侧腹膜之间的疏松组织,穿过脾蒂下方后,在手指引导下于脾蒂后方穿过吻合器钉座,击发后离断脾蒂.然后再离断脾周围韧带,完整切除脾脏.结果 所有手术均顺利完成,无中转开腹手术.手术时间85～ 240 min,平均(152.0±39.9) min.术中出血量50～ 600 ml,平均(263.8±161.2) ml.8例术中输血300 ～ 600 ml,22例术中未予输血.无中转开腹手术.手术并发症包括术后出血1例,腹膜后血肿1例.26病例获电话随访,随访时间1～72个月,平均31个月.1例术后5年发生再次出血,死于原发性肝癌;1例死于肝功能衰竭.结论 脾蒂先离断技术行手助腹腔镜脾切除与断流术可以增加手术安全性,缩短手术时间,减少术后并发症发生机会.     

二级脾蒂离断法在腹腔镜巨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术中的应用

目的总结二级脾蒂离断法在完全腹腔镜下巨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗肝硬化门静脉高压症的临床经验。方法2005年3月至2005年10月间,对15例肝硬化门静脉高压致食管下端静脉曲张患者行完全腹腔镜下巨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术治疗,其中13例应用二级脾蒂离断法处理脾蒂切除脾脏。结果13例在完全腹腔镜下成功应用二级脾蒂离断法巨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术,无1例中转开腹。手术时间(232±47)min,术中失血(480±232)ml。全组均于术后24-72 h内恢复胃肠蠕动,术后第1天下床活动,术后住院时间6-14 d,平均8．7 d。术后发生胸腔积液3例,左膈下脓肿1例,B超引导穿刺治愈。无死亡病例。结论在完全腹腔镜下巨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术中,应用二级脾蒂离断法不仅安全可行,而且节省费用,具有较大的临床推广价值。     

后外侧入路腹腔镜脾切除术:附37例报告

目的探讨后外侧入路腹腔镜脾切除术（LS）的临床应用价值。方法1994年12月至2005年12月我院在开展16例前入路LS的基础上，采用后外侧入路完成37例LS，回顾分析后外侧入路LS的临床资料。结果除1例因套圈套扎脾蒂失败，遂扩大切口将脾脏提至腹壁按常规手术处理脾蒂外，其余手术均在完全腹腔镜下完成。切除脾脏长径7～18cm，7例病人发现副脾（18．9％）。术后切口感染1例，平均手术时间为130min，平均术中失血量80ml，平均术后住院5．5d。结论后外侧入路有利于LS操作，是一种值得推广的手术入路。     

腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术10例疗效分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术的安全性及可行性。方法 2019年3月至2022年7月宁波市鄞州区第二医院共开展10例腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术，其中慢性乙型肝炎后肝硬化、门静脉高压症脾功能亢进5例，脾梗死伴脓肿形成1例，毛细胞白血病1例，脾血管瘤2例，脾恶性肿瘤1例。回顾性分析腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术的手术效果及术后并发症情况。结果 本组10例患者均顺利完成腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术，无中转开腹病例。手术时间130～310 min（中位数190 min），术中出血量50～400 mL（中位数100 mL），术后住院时间5～28 d（中位数8 d）；术中无并发症发生。腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术后发生并发症2例，1例脾脏切除后出现乳糜漏，1例脾脏切除+门奇断流术后出现门静脉血栓，均经保守治疗痊愈。术后均无胰漏发生。结论 本组研究结果表明，腹腔镜胰后入路脾脏切除术是安全可行的。     

腹腔镜巨脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术中优先离断脾蒂的效果观察

目的:探讨为巨脾患者行腹腔镜脾切除联合贲门周围血管离断术(laparoscopic splenectomy plus pericardial devascularization,LSPD)中优先离断脾蒂的效果。方法:选取50例接受LSPD的患者,按切脾方法分为研究组与对照组,每组25例。对照组行常规LSPD,观察组于LSPD术中采用脾蒂优先离断法。对比分析两组手术时间、术中出血量、中转开腹率、术后排气时间、术后下床活动时间、术后住院时间、术后并发症发生情况。结果:观察组手术时间[(201.8±22.3)min vs.(243.9±27.5)min]、术中出血量[(318.2±56.4)ml vs.(530.6±89.2)ml]、中转开腹率(0 vs.16.0%)优于对照组(P0.05);两组术后排气时间[(2.5±1.1)d vs.(2.7±0.8)d]、术后下床活动时间[(2.5±0.8)d vs.(2.4±1.0)d]及术后住院时间[(10.1±2.4)d vs.(9.8±2.0)d]差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组术后均无严重并发症发生。结论:LSPD术中优先离断脾蒂可缩短手术时间,减少术中出血量,降低中转开腹的风险。     

手助腹腔镜脾切除与开腹脾切除治疗巨脾效果比较

比较手助腹腔镜脾切除与开腹脾切除治疗巨脾的效果。回顾性分析41例因巨脾行脾脏切除术的临床资料。手助腹腔镜脾切除术患者23例,开腹脾切除术患者18例。比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后平均住院时间、术后并发症发生率。结果显示,与开腹脾切除术相比,手助腹腔镜脾切除的手术时间长[(313+41.8)min vs(209+19.9)min,P=0.01]、术中出血量少[(324±54.8)ml vs(539±154.8)mL,P=0.01]、术后并发症少(P=0.004)、术后平均住院时间短[(6±1.2)d vs(9±1.4)d,P=0.01]。结果表明,与开腹脾切除术相比,手助腹腔镜脾切除的手术出血量少,术后并发症发生率低,术后住院时间更短,但手术时间长。     

Glisson肝蒂解剖法联合背侧入路行腹腔镜左肝切除:17例报道

目的探讨Glisson肝蒂解剖法联合背侧入路法行腹腔镜左肝切除的安全性和可行性。方法 2017年1月至12月,南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院17例肝病患者纳入回顾性研究。所有患者均接受腹腔镜左肝切除。收集患者的手术时间、术中出血量、中转开腹率、术后并发症及术后住院时间。结果 8例男性和9例女性肝病患者纳入研究。17例患者的年龄(58.71±11.75)岁。17例患者均接受腹腔镜左肝切除,无中转开腹,其中14例行左半肝切除、3例左半肝联合尾状叶切除。手术时间(278.82±66.51)min,术中出血量(323.53±130.05)ml,无中转开腹。3例患者术中输3~4单位悬浮红细胞。其中患者7和患者10均于术后5 d患胆瘘,均于术后2周内治愈出院;其余患者恢复均正常,术后7 d出院。结论 Glisson肝蒂解剖法联合背侧入路行腹腔镜左肝切除安全、有效,是一种值得推广的手术入路。     

全腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法原位巨脾切除术的临床研究

［摘要］ 目的 总结全腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法原位巨脾切除术的手术要点和临床体会。方法 回顾性分析2013年1月~2017年6月48例实施巨脾切除术的患者临床资料,根据手术方式分为观察组（全腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法原位巨脾切除）和开放组（开腹传统法）。比较2组患者手术时间、术中出血、留置腹腔引流管情况、术后拔除引流管时间、并发症及术后住院时间等指标。结果 48例患者均成功完成手术,其中观察组25例均成功在全腹腔镜下完成二级脾蒂离断法原位脾切除术,无中转开腹,观察组手术时间比开放组长（130.40±63.60 min vs 99.13±33.97 min,P=0.038）,术中出血量更少（75.20±50.67 mL vs 206.09±116.77 mL,P=0.000）,术后住院时间更短（8.24±2.20天vs 11.00±3.49天,P=0.002）;观察组留置腹腔引流管的例数更少,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,但两组术后拔除引流管的时间相当;两组间脾窝积液、切口感染和发热两组差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;而观察组术后胸腔积液少于开放组,其差异有统计学意义（P<0.05））;两组均无腹腔出血,腹腔感染,门静脉系统血栓,胰瘘,胃瘘,肝功能衰竭等并发症。术后随访6个月,患者无门静脉系统血栓及肝功能衰竭并发症,胸腔积液已吸收。结论 全腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法原位巨脾切除安全可靠,与开腹传统方法比较,术中出血更少,恢复更快。     

Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy for massive splenomegaly: a comparative study

BACKGROUND: Despite the benefits of the laparoscopic approach to splenectomy, its application in patients with massive splenomegaly (splenic weight >or= 1000 g) remains controversial. In this study we evaluated the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly compared with open splenectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One surgeon applied the laparoscopic approach to splenectomy to all comers with massive splenomegaly, while other surgeons carried out the surgery through a laparotomy. The outcomes of the two approaches were compared on an intention-to-treat basis. Results of continuous variables are shown as medians. RESULTS: Fifteen patients underwent laparoscopic splenectomy between 2000 and 2005, and 13 underwent open splenectomy between 1996 and 2003. The two groups were comparable for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and splenic weight (1.3 vs. 1.1 kg). There was one conversion (6.6%) to open surgery. Although laparoscopic splenectomy was associated with significantly longer operating time (175 vs. 90 minutes, P < 0.001), it carried lower postoperative morbidity and mortality (13.3 vs. 30.8% and 0 vs. 7.7%, respectively). Laparoscopic splenectomy was associated with significantly lower total dose (29 vs. 264 mg morphine-equivalent, P < 0.0001) and duration of opiate usage (1 vs. 4 days, P < 0.0001); duration of parenteral hydration (24 vs. 96 hours, P = 0.006) and more rapid resumption of oral diet (24 vs. 72 hours, P = 0.017); and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (3 vs. 10 days, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach to splenectomy for massive splenomegaly is feasible and safe. Despite a longer operating time, the postoperative recovery following laparoscopic splenectomy is smoother, with lower morbidity and shorter postoperative hospital stay compared with open splenectomy.     

Comparative treatment and literature review for laparoscopic splenectomy alone versus preoperative splenic artery embolization splenectomy

Background

Although laparoscopic splenectomy has been gradually regarded as an acceptable therapeutic approach for patients with massive splenomegaly, intraoperative blood loss remains an important complication. In an effort to evaluate the most effective and safe treatment of splenomegaly, we compared three methods of surgery for treating splenomegaly, including open splenectomy, laparoscopic splenectomy, and a combination of preoperative splenic artery embolization plus laparoscopic splenectomy.

Methods

From January 2006 to August 2011, 79 patients underwent splenectomy in our hospital. Of them, 20 patients underwent a combined treatment of preoperative splenic artery embolization and laparoscopic splenectomy (group 1), 30 patients had laparoscopic splenectomy alone (group 2), and 29 patients underwent open splenectomy (group 3). Patients’ demographics, perioperative data, clinical outcome, and hematological changes were analyzed.

Results

Preoperative splenic artery embolization plus laparoscopic splenectomy was successfully performed in all patients in group 1. One patient in group 2 required an intraoperative conversion to traditional open splenectomy because of severe blood loss. Compared with group 2, significantly shorter operating time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter postoperative hospital stay were noted in group 1. No marked significant differences in postoperative complications of either group were observed. Compared with group 3, group 1 had less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative stay, and fewer complications. No significant differences were found in operating time. There was a marked increase in platelet count and white blood count in both groups during the follow-up period.

Conclusions

Preoperative splenic artery embolization with laparoscopic splenectomy reduced the operating time and decreased intraoperative blood loss when compared with laparoscopic splenectomy alone or open splenectomy. Splenic artery embolization is a useful intraoperative adjunctive procedure for patients with splenomegaly because of the benefit of perioperative outcomes.     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy vs conventional laparoscopic splenectomy in cases of splenomegaly

HYPOTHESIS: Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) is the procedure of choice for elective splenectomy. Splenomegaly may preclude safe mobilization and hilar control using conventional laparoscopic techniques. Hand-assisted LS (HALS) may offer the same benefits of minimally invasive surgery for splenomegaly while allowing safe manipulation and splenic dissection. DESIGN: A retrospective review of patients with splenomegaly undergoing conventional LS or HALS was performed. SETTING: Tertiary care referral center. PATIENTS: Hand-assisted LS was performed at the start of the operation for patients with splenomegaly; splenomegaly was determined by palpation of the splenic tip extending to the midline or the iliac crest, or by a craniocaudal splenic length of greater than 22 cm. Splenomegaly was defined as a splenic weight of greater than 700 g after morcellation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient demographic characteristics, operative indications, splenic weight after morcellation, morbidity, mortality, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with splenomegaly were identified: 31 underwent standard LS and 14 underwent HALS. The HALS group had significantly larger spleens than the conventional LS group (mean weight, 1516 vs 1031 g; P =.02). Mean operative time (177 vs 186 minutes; P =.89), estimated blood loss (602 vs 376 mL; P =.17), and length of hospital stay (5.4 vs 4.2 days; P =.24) and complication rates (5 [36%] of 14 vs 5 [16%] of 31; P =.70) were similar between the HALS and the standard LS groups. No perioperative mortality occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Hand-assisted LS is a safe and efficacious procedure for these extremely difficult cases. Hand-assisted LS provides the benefits of a minimally invasive approach in cases of splenomegaly.     

Laparoscopic splenectomy for hematologic disorders: experience with the first fifty patients

BACKGROUND: Splenectomy is increasingly being performed by various minimal access surgical modalities for select hematologic disorders. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on the first 50 patients on whom laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) was attempted. The data studied included indications for surgery, patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and patient outcomes. A total laparoscopic approach (TLS) was employed in 38 patients and a hand-assisted technique (HALS) was used in 12 patients with massive splenomegaly. Eight patients had concomitant surgical procedures: 7 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 1 patient received a kidney transplant. The most common indications for LS were idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) (50%) and hereditary spherocytosis (24%). RESULTS: LS was successfully completed in 48 patients (96%). Thirty-four patients (68%) required perioperative blood or platelet transfusions. The mean spleen diameter was 17.1 cm (range, 11.2-28.4 cm) on imaging study and mean intact splenic weight was 1019 gm. The mean operative time was 188 minutes (range, 90-340 minutes) in the TLS group and 171 minutes (range, 120-240 minutes) in the HALS group. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 306 mL (range, 40-640 mL) in the TLS group and 163 mL (range, 100-300 mL) in the HALS group. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 3.2 days (range, 2-5 days). CONCLUSION: TLS is safe and feasible in patients with nonpalpable spleens. A concomitant laparoscopic procedure for treating coexisting abdominal pathology may be performed without additional morbidity. The HALS technique may be preferable in patients with splenomegaly (palpable spleens), as it appears to offer intraoperative advantages for retraction, dissection, hemostasis, and organ retrieval.     

Posterolateral approach

Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) is effective and technically feasible for treating various hematological diseases, especially idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). An anterior approach to the vascular pedicle is usually described. However, in this approach to the splenic hilum, the dissection of the splenic artery is often difficult. A total of 13 patients with ITP underwent elective laparoscopic splenectomy. We utilized a laparoscopic posterolateral approach involving dissection of the suspensory ligaments at the lower pole, then dissection and division of the posterolateral attachments, followed by the dissection and ligation of all splenic branches near the splenic parenchyma. This procedure was completed in 11 of our 13 patients and converted to open surgery in the other two patients. Mean operative time was 3 h; mean postoperative stay was 3 days. No blood transfusion was required, and no complications were noted in the postoperative period. The posterolateral approach provides better visualization and control of branches of the splenic vein and artery in the splenic hilum. It also permits visualization and control of surgical hemorrhage through the operating ports. Received: 24 January 1997/Accepted: 28 October 1997     

腹腔镜脾脏切除术中出血的防治体会

目的：探讨腹腔镜脾脏切除术中出血的防治措施。方法：回顾分析哈尔滨医科大学附属第四医院2007年1月—2010年1月开展的63例腹腔镜脾脏切除（LS）患者的临床资料,其中门静脉高压症、脾功能亢进44例,特发性血小板减少性紫癜（ITP）6例,外伤性脾破裂6例,脾恶性淋巴瘤3例,脾血管瘤3例,脾囊肿1例。结果：全部病例均在腹腔镜下完成手术。53例行脾动脉预处理,48例行二级脾蒂法脾切除。手术时间120～200min,平均150min,术中出血150～800mL,平均250mL。结论：脾动脉预处理,二级脾蒂法脾切除是降低术中出血的关键。     

经脐单孔腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法行脾切除的临床应用

目的:探讨经脐单孔腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法行脾切除的临床应用价值。方法:回顾分析2012年6月至2013年8月为30例患者行腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法脾切除术的临床资料。将患者分为单孔腹腔镜组与三孔腹腔镜组,对比分析两组患者术中、术后情况。结果:术后无严重并发症发生。单孔腹腔镜组2例中转单手辅助腹腔镜手术;13例门静脉高压性脾功能亢进患者加行腹腔镜胃底贲门周围血管离断术,发现副脾3例,并予以切除。三孔组5例门静脉高压性脾功能亢进患者加行腹腔镜胃底贲门周围血管离断术,发现副脾1例,并予以切除。单孔组手术时间略长于三孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后镇痛时间、术后排气时间及出院时间单孔组明显短于三孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者术中出血量差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后患者均康复出院,随访2~13个月,无不适症状。结论:经脐单孔腹腔镜下二级脾蒂离断法行脾切除术由腹腔镜技术经验丰富的团队开展是安全、可行的,具有患者创伤小、术后疼痛轻、康复快等优点,手术切口微小,美观效果较好。     

Massive splenomegaly is associated with significant morbidity after laparoscopic splenectomy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of spleen weight on operative and clinical outcome in a series of 108 consecutive laparoscopic splenectomies. BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic splenectomy as an alternative to open splenectomy for splenomegaly is regarded as controversial. METHODS: Patients underwent laparoscopic splenectomy for a range of hematological disorders between November 1992 and February 2000. Multiple linear and logistic regression analysis were used to assess the effect of massive splenomegaly (>1000 g) on perioperative mortality and morbidity, after adjusting for the joint effects of patient age, weight, pre- and postoperative full blood counts, operating time, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, reoperation rate, and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Massive splenomegaly was recorded in 27 of 108 (25%) cases. In this group, splenic weight ranged from 1000 to 4750 g (median, 2500 g). Patients with splenic weight >1000 g had a significantly longer median operating time (170 vs. 102 minutes, P < 0.01), conversion rate (5/27 vs. 4/81, P < 0.05), postoperative morbidity (15/27 vs. 4/81, P < 0.01), and median postoperative stay (5 vs. 3 days, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis found splenic weight to be the most powerful predictor of morbidity (P < 0.01). Patients with splenomegaly (>1000 g) were 14 times likely to have post operative complications. One patient died 3 days after surgery, following a pulmonary embolus (spleen weight 500 g, mortality 1/108, 0.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic splenectomy is feasible in patients with giant spleens. However, it is associated with greater morbidity, and the advantages of minimal access surgery in this subgroup of patients are not so clear.     

Intraoperative acute tumor lysis syndrome during laparoscopic splenectomy preceded by splenic artery embolization

Laparoscopic resection has become the standard of care for routine splenectomy. Preoperative splenic artery embolization for massive splenomegaly has been described to allow a laparoscopic approach in previously ineligible laparoscopic candidates. Our case describes an intraoperative cardiac arrest secondary to tumor lysis after preoperative splenic artery embolization. The patient recovered fully after suffering acute renal failure requiring dialysis for 6 weeks postoperatively. Caution using this approach is necessary to avoid this rare and potentially lethal complication.