基于倾向性评分匹配分析NOSES与常规腹腔镜直肠癌根治术手术部位感染及危险因素

Difference in incidence of surgical site infections between NOSES and conventional laparoscopic radical resection for rectal cancer based on propensity score matching and risk factors

  • 摘要: 目的 比较经自然腔道取标本手术(NOSES)与常规腹腔镜直肠癌根治术的SSI发生率,并分析直肠癌根治术SSI危险因素。方法 采用回顾性队列研究结合倾向性评分匹配(PSM)法,分析2015年1月-2019年12月于中国医学科学院肿瘤医院行直肠癌根治术的3 114例患者的临床资料,其中NOSES组383例,常规腹腔镜组2 731例。依据术前资料1∶1匹配(卡钳值为0.05),匹配后两组各纳入367例患者且基线均衡。对比两组术后短期并发症,同时采用单因素及多因素logistic分析SSI危险因素。结果 PSM后,NOSES组术后SSI率(2.45%)、吻合口瘘发生率(1.09%)均低于常规腹腔镜组(3.00%、2.18%),但无统计学差异。在单因素分析中,男性(P=0.039)、发生吻合口瘘和围手术期出血≥400 ml(均P<0.001)与SSI发生相关。多因素分析显示,围手术期出血≥400 ml(OR=2.193,P=0.015),吻合口瘘(OR=84.468,P<0.001)是直肠癌根治术后SSI的危险因素。结论 经NOSES术后SSI率、吻合口瘘发生率低于常规腹腔镜组,但无统计学差异; 围手术期出血≥400 ml、吻合口瘘是直肠癌根治术SSI的危险因素。

     

    Abstract: OBJECTIVE To compare the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) between natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) and conventional laparoscopic radical resection for rectal cancer and analyze the risk factors for SSI in the patients undergoing the radical resection for rectal cancer. METHODS The clinical data were collected from 3 114 patients who underwent the radical resection for rectal cancer in the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from Jan. 2015 to Dec. 2019 and were analyzed by means of retrospective cohort study combined with propensity score matching method. The patients were divided into the NOSES group with 383 cases and the conventional laparoscopy group with 2731 cases. The patients were matched in a 1∶1 ratio based on preoperative data (with a matching coefficient of 0.05), 367 patients were included in each group after being matched, and the baseline was balanced. The short-term postoperative complications were compared between the two groups, and univariate analysis and multivariate logistic analysis were performed for the risk factors for SSI. RESULTS The incidence of postoperative SSI of the NOSES group was 2.45% after PSM, lower than 3.00% of the conventional laparoscopy group; the incidence of anastomotic fistula of the NOSES group was 1.09%, lower than 2.18% of the conventional laparoscopy group; there were no significant differences. Univariate analysis showed that male (P=0.039), stomal leak and perioperative hemorrhage no less than 400 ml( all P<0.001) were associated with the SSI. Multivariate analysis indicated that the perioperative hemorrhage no less than 400 ml(OR=2.193,P=0.015)and anastomotic fistula(OR=84.468,P<0.001) were the risk factors for the postoperative SSI in the patients undergoing radical resection for rectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS The incidence rates of postoperative SSI and anastomotic fistula are lower in the patients undergoing NOSES than in the patients undergoing the conventional laparoscopy, but there are no significant differences. The perioperative hemorrhage no less than 400 ml and anastomotic fistula are the risk factors for the postoperative SSI in the patients undergoing radical resection for rectal cancer.

     

/

返回文章
返回