ObjectiveTo evaluate whether laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer o ers elderly patients an improved outcome compared with conventional open surgery. MethodsFrom May 2008 to December 2013, clinical data of 163 elderly patients ( ≥ 60 years) who underwent laparoscopic or open repair of perforated peptic ulcer disease were analyzed retrospectively in our hospital. Ninety-one patients received laparoscopic repair and 72 received conventional open repair. The primary end points that were evaluated were total operative time, searching time, nasogastric tube utilization, intravenous fluid requirement, total time of abdominal drainage and urinary catheter usage, time taken to return to normal gastrointestinal motility, percentage of intravenous/intramuscular opiate use, off-bed time, and total in-patient hospital stay. The second end points were morbidity. ResultsThere was a significant diTherence in total operative time in patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair and open repair [(67.9±3.6) minutes vs. (97.8±5.2) minutes]. There was a significant decrease in the time that the nasogastric tube (2.1 days vs. 3.1 days), urinary catheter (2.3 days vs. 3.7 days) and abdominal drain (2.2 days vs. 3.8 days) were required during the postoperative period. Patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair also required less intravenous fluids (2.4 days vs. 4.1 days) and returned to normal gastrointestinal motility [(32.1±1.5) hours vs. (58.4±4.8) hours] and off-bed time significantly earlier than those who had undergone open repair (2.1 days vs. 3.5 days). There was significantly less requirement for intravenous/intramuscular opiate analgesia in patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair (4.7% vs. 45.6%). In addition, patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair required a shorter in-patient hospital stay (4.1 days vs. 5.3 days). Moreover, morbidity of laparoscopic repair was much lower than open repair (3.3% vs. 16.7%). ConclusionLaparoscopic repair is a viable and safe surgical option for elderly patients with perforated peptic ulcer disease and should be considered for all patients.
ObjectiveTo analyze the common reasons of anastomotic leakage following sphincter preservation for rectal cancer, and to explore the better prevention and treatment strategies. MethodThe related literatures of the definition, common causes, and prevention and treatment status of anastomotic leakage were reviewed. ResultsCurrently rectal cancer was one of common malignant tumors, including about 2/3 low rectal cancer.Recently, sphincter preserving surgery had become the preferred surgical procedure.However, the incidence of anastomotic leakage keeping in higher was still the most serious and common complications.Through improving the general condition of the patients, improving surgical techniques, and standardized treatment could effectively reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage. ConclusionReasonable preoperative assessment for the basic situation of patients with rectal cancer, standardized and individualized treatments, contribute to reduce incidence of anastomotic leakage and improve clinical outcomes in patients with low rectal cancer.
ObjectiveTo study the clinical application of enteral microecopharmaceutics immunonutrition in the peroperation of colorectal cancer. MethodsLiteratures about enteral microecopharmaceutics immunonutrition published in China and abroad were collected and reviewed. ResultsEarly clinical application of enteral microecopharmaceutics immunonutrition in the perioperation can greatly improve the nutritional status of patients with colorectal cancer, increase the patients' immune function, reconstruct the intestinal flora, and reduce the incidence of complications. ConclusionsThe clinical application of enteral microecopharmaceutics immunonutrition in the perioperation of colorectal cancer can obviously improve patients' nutritional status and immune function, reduce the stress response, and improve its prognosis, but the use of best dose still need further study.