3.8 Article

Utility of preoperative 3-D simulation of laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for advanced rectal cancer: Surgical outcomes of 10 initial cases

期刊

ASIAN JOURNAL OF ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 355-361

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ases.12476

关键词

Laparoscopic surgery; lateral pelvic lymph node dissection; rectal cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLD) is technically challenging because of the complicated anatomy of the pelvic wall. To overcome this difficulty, we introduced preoperative 3-D simulation. The aim of the study is to investigate the usefulness of preoperative 3-D simulation for the safe conduct of laparoscopic LPLD for rectal cancer. Methods: After undergoing colonoscopy, patients were brought to the radiology suite where multi-detector row CT was performed. Three-dimensional images were constructed at a workstation and showed branches of the iliac artery and vein, ureter, urinary bladder, and enlarged lymph nodes. All members of the surgical team participated in preoperative simulation using the 3-D images. Results: A total of 10 patients with advanced lower rectal cancer and enlarged lateral pelvic lymph nodes underwent laparoscopic unilateral LPLD after total mesorectal excision, tumor-specific mesorectal excision, or total proctocolectomy. Four of the 10 patients (40%) had variations in pelvic vascular anatomy. The median operative time for unilateral LPLD was 91 min (range, 66-142 min) and gradually declined, suggesting a good learning curve. The median number of lateral pelvic lymph nodes harvested was nine (range, 3-16). The median estimated blood loss was 13 mL (range, 10-160 mL). No conversion to open surgery or intraoperative complications occurred. No patient had major postoperative complications. Conclusion: Preoperative 3-D simulation may be useful for the safe conduct of laparoscopic LPLD, especially for surgeons with limited prior experience.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据