孫加玉 李 軍 趙 磊 李正天 許 軍 魏云巍
(哈爾濱醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬第一醫(yī)院腫瘤、腔鏡外科,哈爾濱 150001)
·經(jīng)驗(yàn)交流·
腹腔鏡脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)治療門(mén)靜脈高壓癥7例報(bào)告*
孫加玉 李 軍 趙 磊 李正天 許 軍 魏云巍**
(哈爾濱醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬第一醫(yī)院腫瘤、腔鏡外科,哈爾濱 150001)
目的 探討腹腔鏡脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)(laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization,LSED)治療肝硬化門(mén)靜脈高壓癥(portal hypertension, PHT)的安全性和可行性。 方法 我院2015年1月~2016年5月我科完成7例LSED,均在靜吸復(fù)合麻醉下應(yīng)用二級(jí)脾蒂離斷法行LSED。術(shù)中超聲刀、LigaSure相結(jié)合逐步離斷二級(jí)脾蒂,完全游離脾臟,離斷賁門(mén)周?chē)苤潦彻芟露?~10 cm,分別于脾窩、食管旁放置引流管。術(shù)后2個(gè)月行鋇餐檢查。 結(jié)果 7例均在完全腹腔鏡下完成脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù),手術(shù)時(shí)間200~325 min,平均250.7 min。術(shù)中出血量200~1000 ml,平均421.4 ml。術(shù)后胸腔積液合并低熱2例、術(shù)后脾窩積液合并發(fā)熱1例,均經(jīng)非手術(shù)治療治愈。術(shù)后排氣時(shí)間為3~ 4 d,住院時(shí)間9~12 d。7例隨訪3~17個(gè)月,平均10個(gè)月,術(shù)后2個(gè)月鋇餐檢查示食管胃底靜脈曲張較術(shù)前明顯減輕,均無(wú)再出血。 結(jié)論 LSED治療PHT安全可行。
腹腔鏡; 脾切除; 門(mén)靜脈高壓癥; 賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)
肝硬化門(mén)靜脈高壓癥(portal hypertension, PHT)近50%患者伴有脾功能亢進(jìn)和食管胃底靜脈曲張[1]。脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)是治療PHT的主要手術(shù)方式。近年來(lái),腹腔鏡手術(shù)以創(chuàng)傷小、疼痛輕、恢復(fù)快等優(yōu)點(diǎn)[2]深受外科醫(yī)生青睞,并逐漸應(yīng)用于普外科的各個(gè)領(lǐng)域。伴隨著技術(shù)的進(jìn)步和經(jīng)驗(yàn)的積累,很多既往被認(rèn)為無(wú)法完成的腹腔鏡手術(shù)也逐漸被嘗試和接受,如腹腔鏡肝切除術(shù)。更值得一提的是,腹腔鏡膽囊切除術(shù)[3]和腹腔鏡結(jié)腸癌根治術(shù)[4]已成為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)術(shù)式。然而,腹腔鏡脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)(laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization, LSED)的有關(guān)報(bào)道仍很少。2015年1月~2016年5月我科完成7例LSED治療PHT,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1.1 一般資料
本組7例,男6例,女1例。年齡39~53歲,平均45.7歲。均為乙型肝炎所致肝硬化,2例有嘔血、黑便史。術(shù)前肝膽脾彩超或CT示脾臟長(zhǎng)徑13.7~24.0 cm,平均17.2cm,前后徑4.5~7.2 cm,平均5.6 cm。CT提示食管胃底靜脈曲張。胃鏡檢查示2例有嘔血、黑便史者食管胃底靜脈重度曲張,其余5例食管胃底靜脈曲張分別為重度1例、中度3例、輕度1例。實(shí)驗(yàn)室檢查:紅細(xì)胞(3.31~4.76)×1012/L,平均4.26 ×1012/L;白細(xì)胞(1.56~2.71)×109/L,平均2.35×109/L;血小板(19.4~73.4)×109/L,平均48.4×109/L。
病例選擇標(biāo)準(zhǔn):臨床診斷為PHT,胃鏡檢查示食管靜脈曲張;臨床診斷為PHT,反復(fù)上消化道出血,內(nèi)科治療無(wú)效;臨床診斷為PHT,合并脾功能亢進(jìn),巨脾影響日常生活。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):肝功能Child分級(jí)C級(jí);存在嚴(yán)重的心、肺、腦疾病,不能耐受氣腹;既往有腹部手術(shù)史;合并其他腹部手術(shù)。
1.2 方法
全麻。仰臥位,頭高腳低25°、右傾15°。于臍下緣做10 mm弧形切口,置入10 mm trocar,建立CO2氣腹,維持氣腹壓13 mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa),置入腹腔鏡,直視下分別于劍突下2 cm、左鎖骨中線與肋緣交點(diǎn)下2 cm、左腋前線與肋緣交點(diǎn)下2 cm各置10、10、5 mm trocar(圖1)。脾切除:用超聲刀、LigaSure 交替暴露離斷胃結(jié)腸韌帶、脾結(jié)腸韌帶,游離脾臟下極;離斷脾胃韌帶、脾膈韌帶,游離脾臟上極,粗大的二級(jí)脾蒂血管用Hem-o-lok夾夾閉(圖2)。向頭側(cè)提拉胃壁,顯露胰腺上緣,分離脾動(dòng)靜脈,切割閉合器離斷脾蒂(圖3),完全游離脾臟待取出。賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷:將胃壁上翻,離斷胃短靜脈(圖4)和胃后血管,繼續(xù)向上將胃底曲張血管交通支離斷直至食管左緣。將胃體向左下方牽拉,自胃小彎切跡緊靠胃壁向上游離,切斷冠狀靜脈胃支、食管支及左膈下靜脈,完全離斷周?chē)鷱堁懿h(huán)切賁門(mén)漿膜,游離食管下段6~10 cm(圖5)。將脾臟切成小塊放入標(biāo)本袋,擴(kuò)大臍部切口至3 cm,取出標(biāo)本。分別于脾窩、食管旁放置引流管。
圖1 trocar分布示意圖 圖2 夾閉二級(jí)脾蒂 圖3 離斷脾蒂 圖4 夾閉胃短靜脈 圖5 斷流后離斷胃底食管曲張靜脈叢
7例LSED均順利完成,無(wú)中轉(zhuǎn)開(kāi)腹。手術(shù)時(shí)間200~325 min,平均250.7 min。術(shù)中出血量200~1000 ml,平均421.4 ml。脾臟重量(標(biāo)本剪碎取出后)1.1~2.3 kg,平均1.6 kg。術(shù)后3~4 d排氣并進(jìn)流食,7~10 d拔除引流管,9~12 d出院。術(shù)后胸腔積液合并低熱2例,胸腔穿刺引流后3~4 d拔管。腹腔滲血1例,經(jīng)止血等非手術(shù)治療后緩解。術(shù)后脾窩積液合并發(fā)熱1例,腹腔穿刺引流、補(bǔ)充蛋白等營(yíng)養(yǎng)支持治療后治愈。術(shù)后無(wú)門(mén)靜脈血栓形成、脾蒂血管破裂出血、胰漏、胃漏、膈下感染及肝功能衰竭等并發(fā)癥發(fā)生。7例隨訪3~17個(gè)月,平均10個(gè)月,其中隨訪>1年3例,術(shù)后2個(gè)月鋇餐檢查示食管胃底靜脈曲張較前明顯減輕,其中3例由重度轉(zhuǎn)為中度,其余均轉(zhuǎn)為輕度,血細(xì)胞恢復(fù)正常,術(shù)后均無(wú)上消化道再出血。
腹腔鏡手術(shù)是否適用于PHT所致的脾亢進(jìn)而施行脾切除一直是學(xué)者們所爭(zhēng)論的焦點(diǎn)[5~7]。PHT所致巨脾往往十分巨大,占位效應(yīng)較其他脾臟疾病更加明顯,在腹腔鏡有限的操作空間中會(huì)影響術(shù)野的暴露,使操作更為困難[8]。巨脾常引起脾周?chē)?,與周?chē)M織粘連較重,增加分離難度和術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。另外,PHT巨脾周?chē)o脈迂曲擴(kuò)張,并伴有凝血功能障礙,加之脾組織水腫質(zhì)地脆弱,觸之易出血,一旦出血,腹腔鏡下止血較為困難,中轉(zhuǎn)開(kāi)腹風(fēng)險(xiǎn)較高[9]。因此,在腹腔鏡手術(shù)的早期,多數(shù)學(xué)者認(rèn)為巨脾不適合行腹腔鏡脾切除術(shù)(laparoscopic splenectomy, LS),歐洲內(nèi)鏡外科學(xué)會(huì)曾一度將巨脾作為L(zhǎng)S的禁忌證[10]。隨著腹腔鏡技術(shù)的進(jìn)步及經(jīng)驗(yàn)的積累,越來(lái)越多的學(xué)者嘗試腹腔鏡巨脾切除,也有更多的資料證實(shí)腹腔鏡PHT巨脾切除是安全可行的。Al-Mulhim等[11]認(rèn)為腹腔鏡巨脾切除組雖然手術(shù)時(shí)間長(zhǎng)、術(shù)中出血量多,但術(shù)后并發(fā)癥并未明顯增多。Cheng等[9]分析1999~2014年37篇LS文獻(xiàn)的結(jié)果顯示:LS較開(kāi)腹脾切除具有出血量少、住院日期短、并發(fā)癥少等優(yōu)點(diǎn)。因此,LS被證實(shí)為是一種安全、有效治療PHT的手術(shù)方式。為預(yù)防食管胃底靜脈曲張破裂出血,賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)(esophagogastric devascularization, ED)往往與脾切除同時(shí)進(jìn)行。ED需要離斷食管下段5~10 cm范圍內(nèi)的所有輸入血管,游離位置高、困難大,增加腹腔鏡手術(shù)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。然而,近年來(lái)完全LSED的報(bào)道逐漸增多。Cheng等[8]報(bào)道204例LSED,中轉(zhuǎn)開(kāi)腹率僅為7.8%(16/204)。Zhe等[12]報(bào)道LSED組與開(kāi)腹脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)血管離斷術(shù)(open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization, OSED)組手術(shù)時(shí)間基本相同,LSED組出血量少,術(shù)后腸道功能恢復(fù)更快,是一種可行的手術(shù)方式。
我們采用超聲刀、LigaSure逐步游離、結(jié)扎、離斷二級(jí)脾蒂,手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量及術(shù)后并發(fā)癥較上述文獻(xiàn)報(bào)道并未明顯增多。我們認(rèn)為并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生主要與手術(shù)視野的暴露、術(shù)中操作的輕柔程度有關(guān)。采用仰臥位,頭高腳低25°、右傾15°的體位更有利于手術(shù)視野的暴露。我們采取先處理脾臟上下極后處理脾蒂,減少對(duì)周?chē)⒌俚臓坷瓝p傷,避免術(shù)中脾周血管的破裂出血。大部分患者術(shù)后會(huì)出現(xiàn)胸腔積液,術(shù)中應(yīng)盡量減少對(duì)膈肌的刺激,術(shù)后早期對(duì)其進(jìn)行相應(yīng)處理,不至使其進(jìn)一步惡化。另外,腹腔鏡的放大功能使視野更清晰,其多變的視角可以從不同角度評(píng)估脾周?chē)艿奈恢谩8骨荤R操作器械如超聲刀、切割閉合器和LigaSure等保證術(shù)中的止血效果,不僅縮短手術(shù)時(shí)間,還避免因結(jié)扎線脫落引起的術(shù)后出血。本組沒(méi)有選擇過(guò)度肥胖和具有腹部手術(shù)史的患者,且例數(shù)相對(duì)較少,仍需多中心、大宗病例研究進(jìn)一步證實(shí)LSED的臨床效果。
綜上所述,LSED治療PHT是安全、可行的,但隨訪時(shí)間相對(duì)較短,需要多中心、大樣本的隨機(jī)對(duì)照病例研究證實(shí)其長(zhǎng)期療效。
1 周光文, 楊連粵.肝硬化門(mén)靜脈高壓癥食管、胃底靜脈曲張破裂出血診治專(zhuān)家共識(shí)(2015).中國(guó)實(shí)用外科雜志,2015,10(10): 1086-1090.
2 Musallam KM, Khalife M, Sfeir PM, et al. Postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic splenectomy compared with open splenectomy. Ann Surg,2013,257(6):1116-1123.
3 Ma J, Cassera MA, Spaun GO, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg,2011,254(1):22-27.
4 Tanis PJ, Buskens CJ, Bemelman WA. Laparoscopy for colorectal cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol,2014,28(1):29-39.
5 徐繼威, 張耀明, 宋 越, 等.完全腹腔鏡下脾切除聯(lián)合賁門(mén)周?chē)茈x斷術(shù)治療門(mén)脈高壓癥.中國(guó)微創(chuàng)外科雜志,2015,15(7):601-603.
6 Karadag CA, Erginel B, Kuzdan O, et al. Impact of Spleen Size on Outcomes in Laparoscopic Splenectomy in Children. Gastroenterol Res Pract,2015,2015:603915.
7 Somasundaram SK, Massey L, Gooch D, et al. Laparoscopic splenectomy is emerging ‘gold standard’ treatment even for massive spleens. Ann R Coll Surg Engl,2015,97(5):345-348.
8 Cheng Z, Li JW, Chen J, et al. Therapeutic effects of laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization on liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension in 204 cases. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A,2014,24(9):612-616.
9 Cheng J, Tao K, Yu P. Laparoscopic splenectomy is a better surgical approach for spleen-relevant disorders: a comprehensive meta-analysis based on 15-year literatures. Surg Endosc,2016,324(30):1-14.
10 Habermalz B, Sauerland S, Decker G, et al. Laparoscopic splenectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc,2008,22(4):821-848.
11 Al-Mulhim AS. Laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly in benign hematological diseases. Surg Endosc,2012,26(11):3186-3189.
12 Zhe C, Jian-wei L, Jian C, et al. Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization for bleeding varices or severe hypersplenism: a comparative study. J Gastrointest Surg, 2013,17(4):654-659.
(修回日期:2016-09-21)
(責(zé)任編輯:李賀瓊)
Laparoscopic Splenectomy and Esophagogastric Devascularization for Portal Hypertension: Report of 7 Cases
SunJiayu,LiJun,ZhaoLei,etal.
DepartmentofTumorandEndoscopicSurgery,FirstAffiliatedHospitalofHarbinMedicalUniversity,Harbin150001,China
Correspondingauthor:WeiYunwei,E-mail:hydwyw11@hotmail.com
Objective To investigate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization (LSED) for portal hypertension (PHT). Methods From January 2015 to May 2016, 7 patients underwent LSED in our hospital. They were all operated by cutting secondary structures of the splenic pedicle under the combined intravenous-inhalation anesthesia. The secondary structures of the splenic pedicle were dissected cautiously with ultrasonic scalpel combinded with LigaSure. The esophagus was pulled downwards and the vessels were seperated to a point about 6-10 cm away from the gastric fundus. A drainage tube was routinely placed in spleen nest and nearby the esophagus postoperatively. Barium meal examination was required after 2 months. Results The LSED procedure was completed in all the 7 patients. The median operation time was 250.7 min (range, 200-325 months), and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 421.4 ml (range, 200-1000 ml). Among them, 2 of them had leural effusion with low-grade fever, and 1 of them had spleen nest effusion with fever. All the complications were cured after symptomatic treatment. The postoperative exhaust time was 3-4 days and the postoperative hospital stay was 9-12 days. All the patients received follow-up observations for a mean of 10 months (range, 3-17 months). The barium meal examination after 2 months showed the degree of esophageal varices significantly reduced. No patients had hemorrhage. Conclusion LSED is safe and feasible for patients with PHT.
Laparoscopy; Splenectomy; Portal hypertension; Esophagogastric devascularization
黑龍江省杰出青年科學(xué)基金(JC201416);衛(wèi)計(jì)委資助課題項(xiàng)目(W2014RQ09);中俄轉(zhuǎn)化醫(yī)學(xué)專(zhuān)項(xiàng)基金(CR201415)
B
1009-6604(2017)05-0475-03
10.3969/j.issn.1009-6604.2017.05.023
2016-07-12)
** 通訊作者,E-mail:hydwyw11@hotmail.com