1.Diagnosis and treatment of acute intestinal obstruction in 151 patients over 80
Feng ZHANG ; Qicheng LU ; Haitao WANG ; Rongchao WANG ; Jun XU
Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine 2015;38(z1):51-53
Objective To investigate the diagnosis and treatment of acute intestinal obstruction in aged patients over 80.Methods Data of 151 patients over 80 with acute intestinal obstruction admitted from January 2010 to March 2014 were retrospectively analyzed.Results 136 of 151 cases were mechanical intestinal obstruction,including 95 cases of adhesive ileus,13 cases of tumorous ileus,11 cases of bezoar ileus,4 cases of abdominal internal hernia,3 cases of intestinal volvulus,2 cases of incarcerated oblique hernia,1 cases of duodenal stenosis,1 case of sigmoid stenosis,1 case of anastomotic obstruction after radical resection of rectal cancer because of barium,the cause of ileus was unknown in 5 cases.14 of 151 were dynamic obstruction and 1 of 151 was vascular intestinal obstruction.Conservative treatment was performed in 114 cases and 1 patient died.30 cases received operation,including 14 cases of enterodialysis,6 cases of enterostomy,4 cases of enterotomy,3 cases of enterectomy,1 case of right hemicolectomy,1 case of reduction of volvulus of intestine,1 case of gastronesteostomy,and 1 patient died.7 of 151 were against-advice discharged.12 cases of complications occurred after surgery,including 5 cases of incisional wound infection,2 cases of heart failure,1 case of pulmonary infection,1 case of anastomotic fistula,1 case of infective shock,1 case of early postoperative inflammatory bowel obstruction and 1 case of postoperative delirium.Conclusion Adhesive ileus is the most common cause in aged patients over 80 with acute intestinal obstruction.Rational treatment should be carried out according to different conditions.Conservative treatment is often performed and with active perioperative management,most patients will have satisfied results of surgery.
2.Meta analysis of solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas
Yong YIN ; Zhaoli LI ; Qin WANG ; Rongchao WANG ; Zhong LI ; Qicheng LU ; Jun XU ; Changqing LU ; Tongyu CHEN
Chinese Journal of Pancreatology 2010;10(5):341-344
Objective To summarize the experience of diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas (SPT) in China. Methods The Chinese literature from January 1992 to April 2009 in Chinese Journal Full-text Database was systematically searched and a total of 439 cases of SPT from 42 reports were found. Clinical data of these cases were retrospectively analyzed. Results Among 439 was 28 years old (range 8 ~76 yrs). The clinical symptoms were recorded in 377 cases, including abdominal pain (35. 3%), mass (31. 3%), discomfort (7. 7%). 101 patients (26. 8%) were completely asymptomatic, and the lesions were detected during routine check-up. All of the patients underwent surgical resection. The preoperative misdiagnosis rate was 65.4% ( 161/246 ). The rate of curative resection was 97.3% (427/439). Mean diameter of the tumor was 7.8 cm ( range 1.5 ~ 25.0 cm). Among 394 patients with information on metastases or invasions, 80 patients(20.3% ) were positive. In all patients, 418(95.2% )were followed up and the mean follow-up period was 34 months ( range 1 month to 25 years ). During the follow-up period, 403 ( 96. 4% ) patients were alive with no evidence of recurrence or metastases, local recurrence developed in 4 patients, the liver metastases developed in 6 patients, 4 patients died from the disease. Conclusions SPT is a rare and potentially low-grade malignant tumor, and predominantly affect young women. The correct diagnosis depends on the histopathological examination. Radical surgical resection is the only effective treatment for SPT, which usually has an excellent prognosis.
3.Differences and comparison of prognostic evaluation between AJCC staging system 7th edition and 8th edition for gastric cancer (A report of 1 383 cases)
Huihua CAO ; Ping SHU ; Zhaoqing TANG ; Fenglin LIU ; Jin FENG ; Zhong LI ; Qicheng LU ; Yugang WU
Chinese Journal of Digestive Surgery 2018;17(6):605-611
Objective To compare the differences and clinical value of prognostic evaluation between American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition for gastric cancer (GC).Methods The retrospective case-control study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 1 383 GC patients who were admitted to the First People's Hospital of Changzhou between January 2008 and August 2012 were collected.Distal gastrectomy,proximal gastrectomy + pyloroplasty or total gastrectomy were performed according to preoperative evaluation and intraoperative exploration.Observation indicators:(1) surgical and postoperative situations;(2) follow-up and survival situations;(3) T staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition;(4) N staging comparison of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition;(5) prognostic analysis in N staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition;(6) TNM staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition;(7) prognostic analysis in different TNM staging between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition.Follow-up using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect postoperative survival up to October 2017.Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as x ± s.Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range).The survival curve and survival rate were respectively drawn and calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method,and the Log-rank test was used for survival analysis.Results (1) Surgical and postoperative situations:1 383 GC patients underwent successful radical gastrectomy,including 923 with distal gastrectomy,165 with proximal gastrectomy and 295 with total gastrectomy.Of 1 383 patients,115 with postoperative complications were improved by symptomatic treatment,including 87 with surgical complications and 28 with non-surgical complications.Postoperative pathological examinations:total number of intraoperative lymph node dissection and number of lymph node metastasis were 25± 12 and 7±4;577 didn't have lymph node metastasis and 806 had regional lymph node metastasis;308 were in early GC and 1 075 in advanced GC.(2) Follow-up and survival situations:1 383 patients were followed up for 1-117 months,with a median time of 34 months.The 1-,3-and 5-year survival rates of 1 383 patients were respectively 90.5%,71.9% and 61.1%.(3) T staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:T staging definition between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition was identical.T staging of 1 383 patients:308,192,65,628 and 190 were respectively detected in T1,T2,T3,T4a and T4b stagings.(4) N staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:N staging definition between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition was identical.N staging of 1 383 patients:577,255,207,230 and 114 were respectively detected in N0,N1,N2,N3a and N3b stagings.N3a and N3b were classified as N3 staging of AJCC TNM staging system 7thedition,but they were classified as independent staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition.(5) Prognostic analysis in N staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition:5-year survival rate of patients in N0,N1,N2,N3a and N3b stagings was respectively 85.6%,76.5%,59.4%,45.2% and 32.5% based on AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition,with a statistically significant difference in survival (x2 =394.400,P<0.05).There was a statistically significant difference between N0 and N 1 stagings (x2 =45.630,P<0.05),between N 1 and N2 stagings (x2 =19.470,P<0.05),between N2 and N3a stagings (x2 =7.602,P<0.05) and between N3a and N3b stagings (x2=13.020,P<0.05).(6) TNM staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:TNM staging of 366 patients had changes,including 2 in T1N3b staging,2 in T2N3b staging,18 in T3N3b staging,120 in T4aN2 staging,149 in T4aN3a staging,34 in T4bN0 staging and 41 in T4bN2 staging;364 were detected in staging Ⅲ in 7th edition and 8th edition,and sub-staging of staging Ⅲ had a change;2 in T1N3b of ⅡB staging were redistricted into Ⅲ B staging based on AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition.(7) Prognostic analysis in different TNM staging between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:according to 7th edition,cases and 5-year survival rate were respectively 247,89.5% in Ⅰ A staging and 147,83.7% in Ⅰ B staging and 77,75.9% in ⅡA staging and 207,70.5% in ⅡB staging and 136,61.0% in ⅢA staging and 236,37.5% in Ⅲ B staging and 333,35.4% in Ⅲ C staging,with a statistically significant difference in survival among sub-stagings (x2 =228.800,P<0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in survival among Ⅰ,Ⅱ and Ⅲ stagings (x2=189.000,P<0.05) and between ⅢA and ⅢB or ⅢC stagings (x2=22.710,18.010,P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between Ⅰ A and Ⅰ B stagings (x2=0.179,P>0.05),between Ⅱ A and Ⅱ B stagings (x2 =0.265,P>0.05),and between Ⅲ B and Ⅲ C stagings (x2 =1.550,P>0.05).According to 8th edition,cases and 5-year survival rate were respectively 247,89.5% in Ⅰ A staging and 147,83.7% in Ⅰ B staging and 77,75.9% in Ⅱ A staging and 205,70.7% in Ⅱ B staging and 288,53.8% in ⅢA staging and 258,37.3% in ⅢB staging and 161,28.5% in ⅢC staging,with a statistically significant difference in survival among sub-stagings (x2=234.900,P < 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between Ⅰ A and Ⅰ B stagings (x2 =0.179,P>0.05) and between Ⅱ A and ⅡB stagings (x2 =0.564,P>0.05).There was statistically significant differences in survival between Ⅲ A and Ⅲ B or ⅢC stagings (x2 =29.790,43.060,P<0.05) and between Ⅲ B and Ⅲ C stagings (x2 =7.494,P<0.05).Further analysis showed that changes of TNM staging system between 7th edition and 8th edition were in T3N3b,T4aN2,T4aN3a,T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings,5-year survival rate in above stagings was respectively 16.7%,35.8%,30.2%,47.1% and 26.8%,with statistically significant differences in survival between T3N3b and T4aN2,T4aN3a,T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings (x2 =19.590,8.039,12.070,3.853,P<0.05),between T4aN2 and T4aN3a,T4bN2 stagings (x2 =6.529,3.859,P < 0.05),between T4aN3a and T4bN0 stagings (x2 =10.400,P<0.05) and between T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings (x2=4.636,P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between T4aN2 and T4bN0 stagings (x2 =3.607,P>0.05) and between T4aN3a and T4bN2 stagings (x2 =0.029,P>0.05).Conclusions Compared with AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition,N3a and N3b stagings are classified as independent staging in AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition,and 8th edition is more accurate in prognostic evaluation of GC patients in stage Ⅲ.