Objective:To investigate the application of combined gastroscopy and laparoscopy (dual scope) in the treatment of early gastric cancer.Methods:In this descriptive case series study, we retrospectively collected data on 15 patients with cT1b stage gastric cancer who had undergone combined laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery in the 900th Hospital of the People's Liberation Army of China from May 2020 to October 2022. The study cohort comprised nine men and six women of median age 59 (range: 47–76) years and median body mass index 20.9 (range: 18.3–26.2) kg/m 2. Seven of the lesions were located on the lesser curvature of the gastric antrum and eight in the gastric angle. All lesions were biopsied for pathological examination and evaluated by endoscopic ultrasonography, followed by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and laparoscopic regional lymph node dissection. Studied variables included surgical and pathological features, postoperative factors, and outcomes. Results:In this group of patients, the median (range) operative time for ESD was 45 (30–82) minutes, the duration of laparoscopic lymph node dissection (45.1±8.6) minutes, and the median (range) intraoperative blood loss during lymph node dissection 30 (10–80) mL. Of the 13 patients with negative postoperative horizontal margins, four were stage SM1 and had no lymph node metastases (Stage SM1) and nine were Stage SM2, of which had one positive regional lymph node and two received additional standard distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy concurrently because of positive ESD specimens (lymph node negative). No lymph node metastases were found in the surgical specimens of these patients. The remaining two patients had positive vertical margins; both had undergone concurrent standard distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. One of them was found to be lymph node positive (No. 3, one node). Four patients had impaired gastric emptying after dual-scope treatment, all of whom recovered well with symptomatic management; one patient with a suspected lymphatic leak was also managed conservatively. There were no cases of postoperative bleeding, abdominal infection, or incisional infection. At a median follow-up of 14 (6–26) months, no tumor recurrence or metastasis had been identified in any of the patients. Three patients had a grade B nutrition score 3 to 6 months after surgery, all of whom had undergone major gastrectomy, and two patients who had undergone dual-scope surgery reported an increase in acid reflux and belching after surgery compared with the preoperative period.Conclusion:A combined technique is safe and feasible for the treatment of early gastric cancer and is worthy of further exploration.

With the introduction of minimally invasive methods into the field of surgery, the concept of early gastric cancer (EGC) treating has gradually changed from the pursuit of standardized traditional surgical methods to precise, individualized, interdisciplinary collaborative management. Both endoscopic therapy and laparoscopic surgery have their limitations for early gastric cancer treatment. Meanwhile, Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) combines the advantages of endoscopy and laparoscopy to perform local gastric resection and regional lymph node dissection, providing a more effective surgical approach for radical resection of early gastric cancer. The application of LECS in the treatment of early gastric cancer has been increasing, from the initial laparoscopy-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection to the evolvement of a variety of improved procedures such as combined laparoscopic and endoscopic approach for neoplasia with a non-exposure technique, non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery, and the possibility of combined (sentinel lymph node drainage area) regional lymph node dissection or sentinel lymph node navigation surgery, which expands the indications for endoscopic surgery and maximizes the preservation of normal gastric tissue structure and function while ensuring radical treatment, and will certainly become an important development direction in the treatment of early gastric cancer in the future.

Objective:To investigate the application of combined gastroscopy and laparoscopy (dual scope) in the treatment of early gastric cancer.Methods:In this descriptive case series study, we retrospectively collected data on 15 patients with cT1b stage gastric cancer who had undergone combined laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery in the 900th Hospital of the People's Liberation Army of China from May 2020 to October 2022. The study cohort comprised nine men and six women of median age 59 (range: 47–76) years and median body mass index 20.9 (range: 18.3–26.2) kg/m 2. Seven of the lesions were located on the lesser curvature of the gastric antrum and eight in the gastric angle. All lesions were biopsied for pathological examination and evaluated by endoscopic ultrasonography, followed by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and laparoscopic regional lymph node dissection. Studied variables included surgical and pathological features, postoperative factors, and outcomes. Results:In this group of patients, the median (range) operative time for ESD was 45 (30–82) minutes, the duration of laparoscopic lymph node dissection (45.1±8.6) minutes, and the median (range) intraoperative blood loss during lymph node dissection 30 (10–80) mL. Of the 13 patients with negative postoperative horizontal margins, four were stage SM1 and had no lymph node metastases (Stage SM1) and nine were Stage SM2, of which had one positive regional lymph node and two received additional standard distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy concurrently because of positive ESD specimens (lymph node negative). No lymph node metastases were found in the surgical specimens of these patients. The remaining two patients had positive vertical margins; both had undergone concurrent standard distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. One of them was found to be lymph node positive (No. 3, one node). Four patients had impaired gastric emptying after dual-scope treatment, all of whom recovered well with symptomatic management; one patient with a suspected lymphatic leak was also managed conservatively. There were no cases of postoperative bleeding, abdominal infection, or incisional infection. At a median follow-up of 14 (6–26) months, no tumor recurrence or metastasis had been identified in any of the patients. Three patients had a grade B nutrition score 3 to 6 months after surgery, all of whom had undergone major gastrectomy, and two patients who had undergone dual-scope surgery reported an increase in acid reflux and belching after surgery compared with the preoperative period.Conclusion:A combined technique is safe and feasible for the treatment of early gastric cancer and is worthy of further exploration.

With the introduction of minimally invasive methods into the field of surgery, the concept of early gastric cancer (EGC) treating has gradually changed from the pursuit of standardized traditional surgical methods to precise, individualized, interdisciplinary collaborative management. Both endoscopic therapy and laparoscopic surgery have their limitations for early gastric cancer treatment. Meanwhile, Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) combines the advantages of endoscopy and laparoscopy to perform local gastric resection and regional lymph node dissection, providing a more effective surgical approach for radical resection of early gastric cancer. The application of LECS in the treatment of early gastric cancer has been increasing, from the initial laparoscopy-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection to the evolvement of a variety of improved procedures such as combined laparoscopic and endoscopic approach for neoplasia with a non-exposure technique, non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery, and the possibility of combined (sentinel lymph node drainage area) regional lymph node dissection or sentinel lymph node navigation surgery, which expands the indications for endoscopic surgery and maximizes the preservation of normal gastric tissue structure and function while ensuring radical treatment, and will certainly become an important development direction in the treatment of early gastric cancer in the future.

In recent years, with the emergence of new research evidence, the domestic and foreign guidelines in the field of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) have been updated. The adjusted contents cover almost every link of GISTs management, from GISTs diagnosis, biological behavior, surgical treatment to targeted drug treatment. Since 2020, the NCCN of the United States has separated the contents related to GISTs from the clinical practice guide for soft tissue sarcoma for the first time to form 2021 V.1 versions. The CSCO has also adjusted and upgraded the previous consensus of Chinese experts on the diagnosis and treatment of GISTs to 2020 and 2021 versions of the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of GISTs. This opens a new model of accurate diagnosis and treatment of GISTs under the guidance of evidence-based medicine. The listing of new targeted drugs afatinib and ripretinib is expected to get rid of the drug-resistant treatment dilemma of metastatic GISTs, enrich the back-line treatment camp, provide more opportunities for surgical intervention, and then bring survival benefits to patients with advanced GISTs.

Chronic critical illness (CCI) refers to a group of critically ill patients who survive the acute phase of intensive care, but with persistent organ dysfunction, thus entering a chronic period of continuous dependence on life support system, and still need to stay in intensive care unit (ICU) for a long time. Persistent inflammatory response-immunosuppression-catabolic syndrome (PICS) is the main pathophysiological feature of CCI. Three factors interact to form a vicious circle, leading to poor prognosis. Nutritional support therapy is a key link in the comprehensive treatment of CCI. Enteral nutrition (EN) should be started as soon as possible if conditions permit. If EN can not be implemented, temporary or transitional parenteral nutrition (PN) should be used, and EN should be added gradually in time. At the same time, the amount of PN should be gradually reduced. When EN meets more than 60% of patients’ energy and protein requirements, PN can be considered to be discontinued. The main strategies and functions of CCI nutritional support therapy are as follows: strengthening high protein supply to correct negative nitrogen balance and inhibit catabolism, selecting branched chain amino acids (BCAA) to promote anabolism, using immunomodulators (arginine, ω3 polyunsaturated fatty acids) to improve immune suppression and inflammatory response, supplementing micronutrients (vitamins and trace elements) to counteract the decrease in intake and the increase in consumption, and adding probiotics to maintain the intestinal microecological balance, and so on. Reasonable nutritional support therapy not only improve malnutrition of CCI patients, but also help to reduce complications, thus speeding up rehabilitation, improving prognosis, shortening ICU hospitalization time, and even reducing mortality.

Objective: To explore the efficacy of closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device (Patent number: Z200780013509.8) in the treatment of high perianal abscess. Methods: From January 2015 to December 2016, ≥18-year-old patients with primary high perianal abscess who were treated at our department were prospectively enrolled. Exclusion criteria: (1) recurrent perianal abscess; (2) complicated with anal fistula formation; (3) preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative physical therapy, and curettage treatment, negative pressure irrigation; (4) Crohn′s disease-related perianal abscess; (5) with immunosuppressive status, such as transplant recipients; (6) co-existence of malignant tumors, such as leukemia; (7) with diabetes; (8) those who could not receive long-term follow-up and were not suitable to participate in this study. According to the random number table method, the patients were randomly divided into negative pressure irrigation and suction group and routine drainage group. All patients were clearly diagnosed and the location and size of the perianal abscess were marked before surgery. These two groups were treated as follows: (1) Negative pressure irrigation and suction group: the skin was incised at a diameter of 1-2 cm at the site where the abscess fluctuated most obviously. After the abscess was removed, a closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device was installed and the pressure of -200 to -100 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa) was maintained to keep the abscess cavity collapsed. Generally, the irrigation was stopped 5 days later or when the drainage was clear. The closed vacuum suction was maintained for 2 additional days, before the wound was sutured. (2) Conventional drainage group: conventional incision and drainage was carried out. The skin was cut at a diameter of 8 to 10 cm at the site of abscess with most obvious fluctuation. After the abscess was removed, normal saline gauze was used for dressing. Dressing was changed regularly until the wound healed. The efficacy, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, incision length, frequency of dressing change, pain index (visual analogue score, VAS score), postoperative healing time, complications, recurrence rate of perianal abscess, anal fistula formation rate were observed. The t test and χ² test were used for comparison between the 2 groups. Results: There were both 40 patients in the negative pressure irrigation and suction group and the conventional drainage group. There were 28 males and 12 females in negative pressure irrigation and suction group with a mean age of (38.3±12.0) years and mean disease course of (6.6±2.1) days. The abscess in pelvic-rectal space accounted for 50.0% (20/40) and the mean diameter of abscess was (8.0±3.7) cm. There were 26 males and 14 females in the conventional drainage group with a mean age of (37.1±11.8) years and mean disease course of (6.4±2.5) days. The abscess in pelvic-rectal space accounted for 55.0% (22/40) and the diameter of abscess was (8.2±3.5) cm. The differences in baseline data between two groups were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Both groups successfully completed the operation. There was no significant difference in operative time between two groups (P>0.05). As compared to conventional drainage group, intraoperative blood loss in negative pressure irrigation and suction group was less [(12.1±5.5) ml vs. (18.3±4.4) ml, t=5.606, P<0.001], incision length was shorter [(2.3±0.8) cm vs. (7.6±1.7) cm, t=17.741, P<0.001], postoperative VAS pain scores at 1-, 3-, 7-, and 14-day after operation were lower [3.7±1.4 vs. 7.6±1.8, t=10.816, P<0.001; 3.0±1.3 vs. 6.8±1.6, t=11.657, P<0.001; 2.7±0.9 vs. 5.1±1.1, t=10.679, P<0.001; 1.2±0.3 vs. 1.6±0.4, t=5.060, P=0.019], the dressing change within 7 days after operation was less (3.5±1.2 vs. 12.6±2.7, t=19.478, P<0.001), postoperative healing time was shorter [(10.4±3.0) d vs. (13.5±3.8) d, t=4.049, P<0.001] and postoperative complication rate was lower [17.5% (7/40) vs. 2.5% (1/40), χ²=5.000, P=0.025]. During follow-up of 12 to 36 (24±5) months, the recurrence rate of perianal abscess within 1 year after operation and anal fistula formation rate in negative pressure irrigation and suction group were lower than those in conventional drainage group [5.0% (2/40) vs. 20.0% (8/40), χ²=4.114, P=0.042 and 2.5% (1/40) vs. 17.5% (7/40), χ²=5.000, P=0.025, respectirely]. The one-time cure rate of negative pressure irrigation and suction group and conventional drainage group was 92.5% (37/40) and 62.5%(25/40), respectirely (χ²=10.323, P=0.001). Conclusions The application of the negative pressure irrigation and suction device in the treatment of high perianal abscess can improve the efficiency of one-time cure, reduce postoperative pain, accelerate healing time, decrease the morbidity of postoperative complication and the rates of abscess recurrence and anal fistula formation, indicating an improvement of the treatment.

Objective: Preliminary study on the clinical effect of preoperative ultrasound endoscopy combined with staining labeling technique to locate the actual boundary of esophageal and gastric cancer Methods: From September 1, 2015 to October 30, 2017, 18 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma were enrolled in this study. The actual boundaries of esophageal and gastric-derived adenocarcinoma lesions were localized by endoscopic ultrasonography and staining. There were 10 males and 8 females. After completing the preoperative examination, 1-2 days before operation, endoscopic ultrasonography was used to locate the edge of the lesion. Two point injection of carbon nano suspension was used to mark the location of 1cm at the longest distance from the longitudinal axis of the tumor. According to the length of longitudinal axial staining, the thoracotomy was performed. Intraoperative proximal margin resection was used to send frozen pathology. According to the results of freezing, the operation was decided. After the operation, the specimens from the margin of the tumor were segmented into paraffin section, which was about 0.5cm in each segment, and the tumor cells were observed under the electron microscope at all levels of the paraffin sections. Results: The average time of preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography staining was(10.16±1.38) min, and the diameter of nano carbon diffusion was(1.43±0.41)cm. All patients in the operation could clearly see the nano carbon staining area under the naked eye. In the field, the average time of locating lesions was(1.27±0.53)min. 5 patients underwent thoracoabdominal surgery and 13 underwent abdominal surgery. The average length of the cut margin of the tumor was(4.74±1.12)cm, and the frozen pathology of the incision margin was negative, and no additional operation was performed. The routine pathology confirmed that all the specimens were negative. Conclusion The staining and labeling technique for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction under endoscopic ultrasonography can detect the tumor edge and the scope of invasion accurately. It provides guidance and guarantee for the smooth implementation of AEG precision surgery. It is a safe, rapid and effective positioning technique.

Objective To explore the efficacy of closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device (Patent number: Z200780013509.8) in the treatment of high perianal abscess. Methods From January 2015 to December 2016, ≥18?year?old patients with primary high perianal abscess who were treated at our department were prospectively enrolled. Exclusion criteria: (1) recurrent perianal abscess; (2) complicated with anal fistula formation; (3) preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative physical therapy, and curettage treatment, negative pressure irrigation; (4) Crohn′s disease?related perianal abscess; (5) with immunosuppressive status, such as transplant recipients; (6) co?existence of malignant tumors, such as leukemia; (7) with diabetes; (8) those who could not receive long?term follow?up and were not suitable to participate in this study. According to the random number table method, the patients were randomly divided into negative pressure irrigation and suction group and routine drainage group. All patients were clearly diagnosed and the location and size of the perianal abscess were marked before surgery. These two groups were treated as follows: (1) Negative pressure irrigation and suction group: the skin was incised at a diameter of 1?2 cm at the site where the abscess fluctuated most obviously. After the abscess was removed, a closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device was installed and the pressure of-200 to -100 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa) was maintained to keep the abscess cavity collapsed. Generally, the irrigation was stopped 5 days later or when the drainage was clear. The closed vacuum suction was maintained for 2 additional days, before the wound was sutured. (2) Conventional drainage group: conventional incision and drainage was carried out. The skin was cut at a diameter of 8 to 10 cm at the site of abscess with most obvious fluctuation. After the abscess was removed, normal saline gauze was used for dressing. Dressing was changed regularly until the wound healed. The efficacy, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, incision length, frequency of dressing change, pain index (visual analogue score, VAS score), postoperative healing time, complications, recurrence rate of perianal abscess, anal fistula formation rate were observed. The t test and χ2 test were used for comparison between the 2 groups. Results There were both 40 patients in the negative pressure irrigation and suction group and the conventional drainage group. There were 28 males and 12 females in negative pressure irrigation and suction group with a mean age of (38.3±12.0) years and mean disease course of (6.6±2.1) days. The abscess in pelvic?rectal space accounted for 50.0% (20/40) and the mean diameter of abscess was (8.0±3.7) cm. There were 26 males and 14 females in the conventional drainage group with a mean age of (37.1±11.8) years and mean disease course of (6.4 ± 2.5) days. The abscess in pelvic?rectal space accounted for 55.0% (22/40) and the diameter of abscess was (8.2±3.5) cm. The differences in baseline data between two groups were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Both groups successfully completed the operation. There was no significant difference in operative time between two groups (P>0.05). As compared to conventional drainage group, intraoperative blood loss in negative pressure irrigation and suction group was less [(12.1±5.5) ml vs. (18.3±4.4) ml, t=5.606, P<0.001], incision length was shorter [(2.3±0.8) cm vs. (7.6±1.7) cm, t=17.741, P<0.001], postoperative VAS pain scores at 1?, 3?, 7?, and 14?day after operation were lower [3.7±1.4 vs. 7.6±1.8, t=10.816, P<0.001; 3.0±1.3 vs. 6.8±1.6, t=11.657, P<0.001; 2.7±0.9 vs. 5.1±1.1, t=10.679, P<0.001; 1.2±0.3 vs. 1.6±0.4, t=5.060, P=0.019], the dressing change within 7 days after operation was less (3.5 ± 1.2 vs. 12.6 ± 2.7, t=19.478, P<0.001), postoperative healing time was shorter [(10.4±3.0) d vs. (13.5±3.8) d, t=4.049, P<0.001] and postoperative complication rate was lower [17.5% (7/40) vs. 2.5% (1/40), χ2=5.000, P=0.025]. During follow?up of 12 to 36 (24± 5) months, the recurrence rate of perianal abscess within 1 year after operation and anal fistula formation rate in negative pressure irrigation and suction group were lower than those in conventional drainage group [5.0% (2/40) vs. 20.0% (8/40), χ2=4.114, P=0.042 and 2.5% (1/40) vs. 17.5% (7/40), χ2=5.000, P=0.025, respectirely]. The one?time cure rate of negative pressure irrigation and suction group and conventional drainage group was 92.5% (37/40) and 62.5%(25/40), respectirely (χ2=10.323, P=0.001). Conclusions The application of the negative pressure irrigation and suction device in the treatment of high perianal abscess can improve the efficiency of one?time cure, reduce postoperative pain, accelerate healing time, decrease the morbidity of postoperative complication and the rates of abscess recurrence and anal fistula formation, indicating an improvement of the treatment.

Objective To explore the efficacy of closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device (Patent number: Z200780013509.8) in the treatment of high perianal abscess. Methods From January 2015 to December 2016, ≥18?year?old patients with primary high perianal abscess who were treated at our department were prospectively enrolled. Exclusion criteria: (1) recurrent perianal abscess; (2) complicated with anal fistula formation; (3) preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative physical therapy, and curettage treatment, negative pressure irrigation; (4) Crohn′s disease?related perianal abscess; (5) with immunosuppressive status, such as transplant recipients; (6) co?existence of malignant tumors, such as leukemia; (7) with diabetes; (8) those who could not receive long?term follow?up and were not suitable to participate in this study. According to the random number table method, the patients were randomly divided into negative pressure irrigation and suction group and routine drainage group. All patients were clearly diagnosed and the location and size of the perianal abscess were marked before surgery. These two groups were treated as follows: (1) Negative pressure irrigation and suction group: the skin was incised at a diameter of 1?2 cm at the site where the abscess fluctuated most obviously. After the abscess was removed, a closed negative pressure irrigation and suction device was installed and the pressure of-200 to -100 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa) was maintained to keep the abscess cavity collapsed. Generally, the irrigation was stopped 5 days later or when the drainage was clear. The closed vacuum suction was maintained for 2 additional days, before the wound was sutured. (2) Conventional drainage group: conventional incision and drainage was carried out. The skin was cut at a diameter of 8 to 10 cm at the site of abscess with most obvious fluctuation. After the abscess was removed, normal saline gauze was used for dressing. Dressing was changed regularly until the wound healed. The efficacy, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, incision length, frequency of dressing change, pain index (visual analogue score, VAS score), postoperative healing time, complications, recurrence rate of perianal abscess, anal fistula formation rate were observed. The t test and χ2 test were used for comparison between the 2 groups. Results There were both 40 patients in the negative pressure irrigation and suction group and the conventional drainage group. There were 28 males and 12 females in negative pressure irrigation and suction group with a mean age of (38.3±12.0) years and mean disease course of (6.6±2.1) days. The abscess in pelvic?rectal space accounted for 50.0% (20/40) and the mean diameter of abscess was (8.0±3.7) cm. There were 26 males and 14 females in the conventional drainage group with a mean age of (37.1±11.8) years and mean disease course of (6.4 ± 2.5) days. The abscess in pelvic?rectal space accounted for 55.0% (22/40) and the diameter of abscess was (8.2±3.5) cm. The differences in baseline data between two groups were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Both groups successfully completed the operation. There was no significant difference in operative time between two groups (P>0.05). As compared to conventional drainage group, intraoperative blood loss in negative pressure irrigation and suction group was less [(12.1±5.5) ml vs. (18.3±4.4) ml, t=5.606, P<0.001], incision length was shorter [(2.3±0.8) cm vs. (7.6±1.7) cm, t=17.741, P<0.001], postoperative VAS pain scores at 1?, 3?, 7?, and 14?day after operation were lower [3.7±1.4 vs. 7.6±1.8, t=10.816, P<0.001; 3.0±1.3 vs. 6.8±1.6, t=11.657, P<0.001; 2.7±0.9 vs. 5.1±1.1, t=10.679, P<0.001; 1.2±0.3 vs. 1.6±0.4, t=5.060, P=0.019], the dressing change within 7 days after operation was less (3.5 ± 1.2 vs. 12.6 ± 2.7, t=19.478, P<0.001), postoperative healing time was shorter [(10.4±3.0) d vs. (13.5±3.8) d, t=4.049, P<0.001] and postoperative complication rate was lower [17.5% (7/40) vs. 2.5% (1/40), χ2=5.000, P=0.025]. During follow?up of 12 to 36 (24± 5) months, the recurrence rate of perianal abscess within 1 year after operation and anal fistula formation rate in negative pressure irrigation and suction group were lower than those in conventional drainage group [5.0% (2/40) vs. 20.0% (8/40), χ2=4.114, P=0.042 and 2.5% (1/40) vs. 17.5% (7/40), χ2=5.000, P=0.025, respectirely]. The one?time cure rate of negative pressure irrigation and suction group and conventional drainage group was 92.5% (37/40) and 62.5%(25/40), respectirely (χ2=10.323, P=0.001). Conclusions The application of the negative pressure irrigation and suction device in the treatment of high perianal abscess can improve the efficiency of one?time cure, reduce postoperative pain, accelerate healing time, decrease the morbidity of postoperative complication and the rates of abscess recurrence and anal fistula formation, indicating an improvement of the treatment.