技术方法

机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术治疗肾肿瘤瘤栓侵犯血管壁

  • 刘帅 ,
  • 刘茁 ,
  • 管允鹤 ,
  • 王国良 ,
  • 田晓军 ,
  • 张洪宪 ,
  • 刘磊 ,
  • 马潞林 ,
  • 张树栋 , *
展开
  • 北京大学第三医院泌尿外科,北京 100191

* These authors contributed equally to this work

收稿日期: 2025-03-04

  网络出版日期: 2025-08-02

基金资助

国家自然科学基金(82273389)

北京大学第三医院临床重点项目(BYSYZD2023035)

版权

版权所有,未经授权,不得转载。

Robot-assisted laparoscopic inferior vena cava segmental resection for renal tumor with tumor thrombus invading the vascular wall

  • Shuai LIU ,
  • Zhuo LIU ,
  • Yunhe GUAN ,
  • Guoliang WANG ,
  • Xiaojun TIAN ,
  • Hongxian ZHANG ,
  • Lei LIU ,
  • Lulin MA ,
  • Shudong ZHANG , *
Expand
  • Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
ZHANG Shudong, e-mail,

Received date: 2025-03-04

  Online published: 2025-08-02

Supported by

the National Natural Science Foundation of China(82273389)

Peking University Third Hospital Clinical Key Project(BYSYZD2023035)

Copyright

All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.

摘要

目的: 系统评估机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术在肾肿瘤合并下腔静脉瘤栓治疗中的安全性及肿瘤控制效果。方法: 回顾性分析2021年1月至2025年2月北京大学第三医院泌尿外科收治的,行机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术的肾肿瘤患者临床资料,采集患者基本信息、肿瘤参数、围术期指标及随访信息,通过电子病历系统提取手术记录及病理报告。连续变量以中位数(P25P75)描述,分类变量以频数(百分比)呈现。结果: 共44例患者纳入本研究,中位年龄62(55,68)岁,男性31例、女性13例,右侧肿瘤39例、左侧5例,中位肿瘤直径8.1(6.1,10.1) cm,Mayo分级Ⅱ级37例、Ⅲ级6例、Ⅳ级1例,23例患者接受了新辅助治疗,17例患者合并下腔静脉血栓。中位手术时间224.0(167.3,303.8) min,术中失血量500.0(300.0,850.0) mL,19例患者接受输血,悬浮红细胞中位输注量800.0(400.0,1 200.0) mL。术后并发症发生率56.8%(25/44),Clavien-Dindo分级Ⅰ级8例、Ⅱ级17例;手术相关并发症包括下肢深静脉血栓6例、贫血需输血治疗5例、下肢水肿2例、肺栓塞2例,无手术相关死亡事件发生;术后中位肌酐116.0(86.5,157.5) μmol/L。病理组织学分析显示,肾透明细胞癌占大多数,为34例(77.3%);术后肾肿瘤病理分期T3b期12例、T3c期29例、T4期3例,N1期8例,M1期17例。中位随访时间为10个月(范围1~49个月),3例患者发生肿瘤特异性死亡,1例患者因其他原因死亡,5例患者随访期间发生肺转移,4例发生肝转移,4例发生局部复发。9例患者术后接受靶向和免疫联合辅助治疗,18例患者仅接受靶向辅助治疗。结论: 机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术可实现复杂静脉瘤栓的精准切除,短期疗效确切,但需警惕血管相关并发症风险。

本文引用格式

刘帅 , 刘茁 , 管允鹤 , 王国良 , 田晓军 , 张洪宪 , 刘磊 , 马潞林 , 张树栋 . 机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术治疗肾肿瘤瘤栓侵犯血管壁[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2025 , 57(4) : 796 -802 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2025.04.027

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic inferior vena cava (IVC) segmental resection in renal tumor with IVC tumor thrombus (IVCTT). Methods: Clinical data from renal tumor patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic IVC segmental resection at Peking University Third Hospital from Jan. 2021 to Feb. 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. Data collection included baseline demographics, tumor characteristics, perioperative parameters, and follow-up outcomes. Surgical records and pathological reports were retrieved from the electronic medical record system. Continuous variables were presented as median (P25, P75), and categorical variables as frequency (percentage). Results: Forty-four patients were enrolled. The cohort comprised 31 males and 13 females, with a median age of 62 (55, 68) years. Right-sided tumors were observed in 39 cases and left-sided in 5 cases. Median tumor diameter was 8.1 (6.1, 10.1) cm. Mayo classifications included grade Ⅱ (n=37), Ⅲ (n=6), and Ⅳ (n=1). Neoadjuvant therapy was administered to 23 patients. Seventeen patients were complicated by IVC bland thrombus. Median operative time was 224.0 (167.3, 303.8) min, with intraoperative blood loss of 500.0 (300.0, 850.0) mL. Transfusion was administered to 19 patients, with a median blood transfusion of 800.0 (400.0, 1 200.0) mL. Postoperative complications occurred in 25 cases (56.8%), classified as Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅰ (n=8) and grade Ⅱ (n=17). Procedure-specific complications included deep vein thrombosis (n=6), transfusion-requiring anemia (n=5), lower extremity edema (n=2), and pulmonary embolism (n=2), with no procedure- related mortality. Median postoperative serum creatinine was 116.0 (86.5, 157.5) μmol/L. Pathological examination identified clear cell renal cell carcinoma as the predominant subtype, observed in 34 cases (77.3%). Pathological staging revealed T3b (n=12), T3c (n=29), and T4 (n=3) disease, with nodal involvement (N1) in 8 cases and distant metastasis (M1) in 17. At a median follow-up of 10 months (range: 1-49 months), cancer-specific mortality occurred in 3 patients, while 1 succumbed to other causes. Disease progression included pulmonary metastasis (n=5), hepatic metastasis (n=4), and local recurrence (n=4). Adjuvant therapy regimens comprised targeted-immunotherapy combinations (n=9) and targeted monotherapy (n=18). Conclusion: Robot-assisted laparoscopic IVC segmental resection achieves precise thrombus removal with confirmed short-term efficacy in renal tumor with IVCTT, though vigilance against vascular complications remains critical.

肾肿瘤发病率逐年上升,全球每年约有15.5万人死于肾肿瘤[1]。肾肿瘤可侵袭静脉系统,有4%~10%的肾肿瘤患者存在静脉瘤栓[2],瘤栓侵犯下腔静脉壁者预后较差,5年生存率仅为33.5%[3],瘤栓完全切除者3年生存率为63%[4],因此,将侵犯静脉壁的肿瘤组织完全切除是手术的首要目标。对于广泛累及下腔静脉壁的肾肿瘤瘤栓病例,下腔静脉节段性切除术是实现肿瘤完整清除的必要术式[5-7],但肿瘤根治性切除术和下腔静脉节段性切除术联合操作的技术复杂性与围术期风险显著增加,术后血管相关并发症的防控仍是临床难点[8]
在微创外科技术持续革新的背景下,腔镜手术模式已从传统腹腔镜向机器人辅助系统迭代发展,机器人平台凭借高分辨率三维成像、高灵敏度机械臂、符合外科医生操作习惯的仿生学设计以及技术掌握周期短的优势,显著提升了复杂腔内操作的可行性,目前已被越来越多的医疗机构用于外科手术[9]。本研究的目的是系统评估机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术在复杂血管解剖条件下的操作安全性及肿瘤控制效果。

1 资料与方法

1.1 一般资料

回顾性收集2021年1月至2025年2月北京大学第三医院泌尿外科收治的合并下腔静脉瘤栓的肾肿瘤患者临床资料,纳入行机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术的患者,排除经术后病理证实不符合2016版世界卫生组织(World Health Organization,WHO)肾肿瘤分类标准者(如尿路上皮癌等)。手术方式的选择根据术前影像或术中所见瘤栓侵犯下腔静脉范围决定,适应证包括:瘤栓呈浸润性生长且与下腔静脉壁紧密粘连、瘤栓累及下腔静脉周径≥2/3区域、下腔静脉管腔被瘤栓完全闭塞。
患者的临床资料包括诊断时的年龄、性别、体重指数(body mass index, BMI)、肿瘤侧别、瘤栓Mayo分级、美国麻醉师协会(American Society of Anesthesiologists,ASA)分级、手术时间、术中出血量、输血信息、是否淋巴结清扫、是否同侧肾上腺切除、术后住院天数、术前和术后血肌酐、围术期并发症。肿瘤病理信息包括肿瘤病理类型、肿瘤直径、病理分级、是否淋巴结转移、是否肾上腺转移。患者术前均进行了泌尿系B超和腹部计算机断层扫描(computed tomography,CT)平扫+增强,明确肾脏占位侧别、解剖定位(与肾门血管及集合系统空间关系)及肿瘤直径,并结合腹部磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging,MRI)评估瘤栓高度、瘤栓大小和静脉壁侵犯情况。腔静脉壁被瘤栓侵犯的影像学特征如下:管壁不规则伴“毛刺征”,管腔直径超过正常值1.5倍(正常下腔静脉直径为近心脏处腔静脉直径),下腔静脉管壁周围水肿带,瘤栓形态呈不规则生长[10]。患者经超声心动图评估心脏功能及心房瘤栓情况。瘤栓位置和水平根据Mayo分级系统进行定义[11],肿瘤分期依据2017年美国癌症联合委员会(American Joint Committee on Cancer,AJCC)肾细胞癌TNM分期[12],围术期并发症按Clavien-Dindo分级[13]

1.2 手术方法

对于右侧肾肿瘤合并下腔静脉瘤栓患者,全身麻醉后左侧卧位,按以下位置置入机器人穿刺器建立经腹腔操作空间:在脐右侧外上方11肋水平腹直肌旁、同侧腹直肌旁肋缘下、髂嵴内上方3 cm处分别置入8 mm Trocar,另在脐上缘及其上方8 cm处分别放置12 mm Trocar,于剑突下置入5 mm Trocar。游离肾周筋膜后,游离下腔静脉,在左侧游离暴露左肾静脉的上角和下角(图 1A),采用血管阻断带向上悬吊以暴露空间,切断左肾静脉,然后截断下腔静脉远心端(图 1B),采用“下极上翻法”将下腔静脉残端掀起(图 1C),依次游离并切断右肾动脉(图 1D)、两支肝短静脉(图 1EF),最后截断下腔静脉近心端(图 1GH),完成下腔静脉节段性切除术。术后标本见图 1I
图1 右侧肾肿瘤患者行机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术手术步骤

Figure 1 Surgical procedures of robot-assisted laparoscopic segmental resection of inferior vena cava in the patient with right renal tumor

A, clipping and transection of left renal vein; B, linear stapler division of distal inferior vena cava (IVC); C, dissection and exposure of posterior IVC plane; D, transection of right renal artery; E, isolation of short hepatic veins; F, Maryland forceps electrocautery division of second short hepatic vein; G, placement of vascular occlusion tape; H, proximal IVC transection with linear stapler; I, postoperative specimen (blue arrow indicating renal tumor, red arrow showing tumor thrombus).

对于左侧肾肿瘤患者,先在右侧卧位下游离切除左肾并截断左肾静脉瘤栓,再中转为左侧卧位行下腔静脉瘤栓取出术。右侧卧位时按以下位置置入机器人穿刺器:腹直肌旁平脐水平处置入8 mm Trocar,并插入30°腹腔镜以建立视野。在腹腔镜引导下,分别于左侧腹直肌旁脐上及脐下8 cm水平置入8 mm Trocar,再于脐上及脐下4 cm邻近中线处分别置入12 mm Trocar。依次游离和切断左侧输尿管、肾动脉(图 2AB),游离左肾和肾上腺,找到左肾静脉并进行截断(图 2CD)。中转为左侧卧位后,按上述右侧肾肿瘤相同位置置入机器人穿刺器,游离下腔静脉和右肾静脉(图 2E),斜行阻断右肾静脉上方下腔静脉(图 2E),在左肾静脉入口处剪开下腔静脉,见瘤栓广泛侵犯下腔静脉壁,无法取出(图 2F),缝合下腔静脉切口。斜行截断右肾静脉上方下腔静脉远心端(图 2G),保留右肾静脉,向上游离下腔静脉至肝静脉下方,截断下腔静脉近心端(图 2HI),完成下腔静脉节段性切除术。
图2 左侧肾肿瘤患者行机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术手术步骤

Figure 2 Surgical procedures of robot-assisted laparoscopic segmental resection of inferior vena cava in the patient with left renal tumor

A, division of left ureter; B, dissection and transection of left renal artery; C, dissection of left renal vein; D, transaction of left renal vein; E, exposure of inferior vena cava (IVC); F, tumor thrombus invades the wall of the vena cava; G, linear stapler division of distal IVC; H, proximal IVC transection with linear stapler; I, proximal IVC transection with linear stapler.

对于侵犯入心房的Mayo Ⅳ级瘤栓,若在心房内侵犯长度大于2.5 cm,联合心脏外科行正中开胸并体外循环,清除心房内瘤栓,术中实时经食管超声监测瘤栓残余。

1.3 术后随访

术后每3~6个月进行1次随访,持续2年,此后进行每年1次随访。随访时检查肾功能,并使用B超或CT监测肿瘤局部复发或转移,记录患者术后靶向或免疫治疗情况。

1.4 统计学分析

本研究使用SPSS 27.0软件进行描述性统计分析,连续性变量以中位数(P25P75)描述,分类变量以频数(百分比)表示。采用Kaplan-Meier方法估计中位随访时间。

2 结果

2021年1月至2025年2月期间共46例患者于我院进行了机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术,2例因病理类型为尿路上皮癌而被排除,最终共纳入44例患者,患者详细临床特征见表 1。其中31例男性、13例女性,中位年龄62(55,68)岁,中位BMI 24.5(22.1,27.3) kg/m2,右侧肾肿瘤39例、左侧5例,中位肿瘤直径8.1(6.1,10.1) cm,影像学评估显示瘤栓Mayo分级Ⅱ级37例(84.1%)、Ⅲ级6例(13.6%)、Ⅳ级1例(2.3%)。
表1 机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除患者的临床特征(n=44)

Table 1 Patient characteristics of robot-assisted laparoscopic segmental resection of the inferior vena cava (n=44)

Items Data
Age/years, median (P25, P75) 62 (55, 68)
Male, n(%) 31 (70.5)
Body mass index, median (P25, P75) 24.5 (22.1, 27.3)
Side, n(%)
  Left 5 (11.4)
  Right 39 (88.6)
Size/cm, median (P25, P75) 8.1 (6.1, 10.1)
Mayo classification, n(%)
  Ⅰ 0 (0)
  Ⅱ 37 (84.1)
  Ⅲ 6 (13.6)
  Ⅳ 1 (2.3)
ASA class, n(%)
  Ⅰ 2 (4.5)
  Ⅱ 28 (63.6)
  Ⅲ 14 (31.8)
Operative time/min, median (P25, P75) 224.0 (167.3, 303.8)
Estimated blood loss/mL, median (P25, P75) 500.0 (300.0, 850.0)
Patients receiving transfusion, n(%) 19 (43.2)
Lymph node dissection, n(%) 29 (65.9)
Adrenalectomy, n(%) 31 (70.5)
Postoperative hospital stay/d, median (P25, P75) 6 (5, 8)
Preoperative serum creatinine/(μmol/L), median (P25, P75) 102.5 (82.3, 115.3)
Postoperative serum creatinine/(μmol/L), median (P25, P75) 116.0 (86.5, 157.5)
Venous tumor thrombus combined with bland thrombus, n(%) 17 (38.6)
Histological type, n(%)
  Clear cell renal cell carcinoma 34 (77.3)
  Papillary renal cell carcinoma 2 (4.5)
  Unclassified renal cell carcinoma 2 (4.5)
  Spindle cell sarcoma 1 (2.3)
  Leiomyosarcomas 1 (2.3)
  TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma 1 (2.3)
  Fumarate hydratase-deficient renal cell carcinoma 1 (2.3)
  Indeterminate histology due to treatment response 2 (4.5)
Four-tiered WHO/ISUP grading system, n(%)
  Ⅰ 1 (2.3)
  Ⅱ 8 (18.2)
  Ⅲ 10 (22.7)
  Ⅳ 15 (34.1)
  Not graded 10 (22.7)
T stage, n(%)
  T3b 12 (27.3)
  T3c 29 (65.9)
  T4 3 (6.8)
N1, n(%) 8 (18.2)
M1, n(%) 17 (38.6)
Adrenal metastasis, n(%) 3 (6.8)
Invade the wall of the vena cava, n(%) 36 (81.8)
Complication, n(%) 25 (56.8)

“Not graded” includes tumors with treatment-induced necrosis obscuring architecture, and subtypes without validated grading criteria. ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; WHO, World Health Organization; ISUP, International Society for Urological Pathology.

23例患者进行了新辅助治疗,其中18例为靶向和免疫联合治疗(阿昔替尼联合帕博利珠单抗7例、联合替雷利珠单抗6例、联合特瑞普利单抗1例,阿帕替尼联合卡瑞利珠单抗3例, 仑伐替尼联合替雷利珠单抗1例), 另5例为单独靶向治疗(阿昔替尼、培唑帕尼、舒尼替尼或依维莫司)。17例患者合并下腔静脉血栓。中位手术时间为224.0 (167.3,303.8) min;术中失血量500.0(300.0,850.0) mL,19例患者接受了术中输血,悬浮红细胞中位输注量800.0(400.0,1 200.0) mL,12例输注血浆,中位输注量400.0(400.0,750.0) mL;29例患者进行了肾门淋巴结清扫,31例行同侧肾上腺切除。
病理组织学分析显示,肾透明细胞癌34例(占77.3%),Ⅱ型乳头状肾细胞癌和未分类的肾细胞癌各2例,肾高级别梭型细胞肉瘤、平滑肌肉瘤、TFE3易位性肾细胞癌和琥珀酸脱氢酶缺陷相关的肾细胞癌各1例,2例接受靶向和免疫联合新辅助治疗患者出现显著病理缓解,无法判断病理分型。肾透明细胞癌和乳头状肾细胞癌中WHO/国际泌尿病理协会(International Society for Urological Pathology,ISUP)核分级Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ级各有1例、8例、10例和15例,2例核分级无法获取。术后TNM分期T3b期12例、T3c期29例、T4期3例;N0期36例,N1期8例;M0期27例,M1期17例。15例患者术前已有肺转移,2例胸膜转移,1例髂骨转移。
患者中位住院时间6(5,8) d,中位术前血清肌酐(serum creatinine,SCr)为102.5(82.3,115.3)μmol/L,中位术后1周SCr为116.0(86.5,157.5) μmol/L。25例患者发生术后并发症,Clavien-Dindo分级Ⅰ级8例、Ⅱ级17例。14例并发症与下腔静脉节段性切除术相关,下肢静脉血栓形成6例,贫血需输血治疗5例,下肢水肿和肺栓塞各2例(其中1例患者同时合并贫血及肺栓塞)。本组无Clavien-Dindo分级≥Ⅲ级的严重并发症,且无手术相关死亡事件发生。
本组中位随访时间为10个月(范围1~49个月),有3例患者发生肿瘤特异性死亡,1例因其他原因死亡,5例发生肺转移,4例发生肝转移,4例原位复发。9例患者术后接受靶向和免疫联合辅助治疗,18例患者仅接受靶向治疗。

3 讨论

根治性肾切除联合下腔静脉瘤栓取出术可显著提升合并静脉瘤栓肾肿瘤患者的远期生存。对于存在静脉壁浸润的病例,需实施受累血管壁整块切除以实现R0切除目标[14]。对于下腔静脉壁受侵犯较少患者,行下腔静脉切开后取净瘤栓,并行受累静脉管壁部分切除,采用血管线连续缝合重建静脉通路,保留健侧静脉流出道,以维持生理性静脉回流。当瘤栓广泛累及下腔静脉时,应进行节段性血管切除,这一术式在解剖学上具备可行性,并且术后肾功能恢复良好[15]。下腔静脉周围肾静脉至髂总静脉段存在丰富的侧支循环网络,包括腹壁下静脉、腰升静脉、奇静脉、椎旁静脉丛及腹壁浅静脉等[16],可有效维持盆腔脏器与下肢静脉回流。
手术策略的制定需综合评估瘤栓对下腔静脉壁的浸润范围及侵犯高度。MRI对下腔静脉壁浸润的诊断效能显著(敏感度92.3%、特异度86.4%)[10],其影像学特征包括静脉管壁不规则、管腔扩张、静脉周围T2高信号水肿带、瘤栓不规则生长(HR=3.15)[17]。术前MRI显示下腔静脉前后径>1.8 cm或连接腔静脉处肾静脉直径>1.4 cm(敏感度90%),可作为浸润性生长的影像标志[18];腹部CT提示下腔静脉直径>4 cm,是瘤栓侵犯腔静脉壁的预测因素[19];另外,术中超声造影成像通过动态增强模式分析显示瘤栓-静脉壁同步强化及管壁连续性中断,也可预测瘤栓侵犯腔静脉(敏感度93.1%,特异度93.5%)[20]
尽管术前多模态影像(CT/MRI)可初步评估下腔静脉壁被瘤栓侵犯的程度,但术中直视探查仍是判断腔静脉是否被侵犯从而决定手术方式的最终判断标准。本组病例中,下腔静脉壁被侵犯的术中特征包括:管壁粗糙不规则,切开后腔静脉内膜呈白色,触诊质地硬、弹性下降。腔静脉血管造影虽能精确显示血管被瘤栓阻塞程度及侧支循环代偿状态,但因其有创性且费用较高,在临床上应用受限[21]。目前对下腔静脉壁被瘤栓侵犯尚无统一定义标准,本单位采用多维度诊断体系,结合术前影像特征、术中直视探查及术后病理综合诊断。本组44例患者中仅有23例(52.3%)术前经影像学评估考虑瘤栓侵犯静脉壁并经术后病理验证,14例(31.8%)术前无法明确,经术中探查发现静脉壁受累,值得注意的是,8例(18.2%)接受新辅助治疗患者虽在术前或术中提示静脉壁受累,但术后病理并未检测到静脉壁浸润,或仅见广泛坏死组织而未见瘤栓内肿瘤细胞残留,此现象提示新辅助治疗可能诱导肿瘤降级或完全缓解[22]
肾肿瘤合并下腔静脉瘤栓的外科处理需依据肿瘤侧别及瘤栓形态学特征制定个体化策略。对于右侧肾肿瘤合并下腔静脉瘤栓病例,实施下腔静脉节段性切除在解剖学上具备可行性,因为左肾静脉有丰富的侧支循环网络(腰升静脉、性腺静脉及肾上腺静脉)。当瘤栓累及左肾静脉入口时,行左肾静脉节段性切除;若左肾静脉入口未受累,则保留其流出道并利用肾静脉以下下腔静脉建立代偿性静脉回流;对于左肾静脉汇入下腔静脉处直径较细导致回流受限病例,可采用自体下腔静脉补片行左肾静脉成形术,以确保左肾血液回流通畅。对于左侧病例,因右肾静脉解剖特性导致侧支代偿不足,下腔静脉节段性切除易导致静脉高压,术后下肢水肿发生率更高,需采用血管重建策略。自体肾移植术(右肾静脉-肾下段下腔静脉端侧吻合)联合腰升静脉-髂外静脉侧支代偿,可使术后估算的肾小球滤过率下降幅度≤20%。若术中发现右肾静脉入口未受累,推荐下腔静脉斜行切除保留流出道,而对于多支右肾静脉受累病例,则需选择性切除受累分支。本组5例左侧肾肿瘤病例在行下腔静脉节段性切除后,均保留右肾静脉流出道。
近年来,机器人辅助下腔静脉瘤栓取出术在MayoⅠ~Ⅳ级病例中逐步应用于临床实践,其临床疗效已获初步验证[23-24]。现有证据表明,机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术在围手术期管理方面展现出显著优势,包括有效控制术中出血量、缩短重症监护时间以及促进术后胃肠功能恢复[25-26]。既往研究报道,开放或腹腔镜传统术式腔静脉节段性切除术并发症发生率为81.3%[2],本研究报道的机器人辅助术式的并发症发生率降至56.8%。要确定下腔静脉节段性切除术患者从机器人辅助治疗中获益的程度,需要开展基于严格匹配设计的前瞻性队列研究,尤其需要建立标准化的手术适应证评估体系。
尽管机器人平台显著提升了手术精度,但肿瘤微残留仍是影响远期疗效的关键因素,纳米技术在肿瘤治疗中的应用为提高手术效果提供了新的思路,通过仿生纳米平台实现药物的精准递送和肿瘤微环境调控,可有效减少术后微残留并增强局部治疗效果[27]。另外,微生物疗法作为一种新兴的免疫治疗手段,也可以在术后辅助治疗中发挥重要作用,可通过调节肿瘤免疫微环境增强抗肿瘤免疫应答。最新研究证实,基因工程改造的减毒沙门氏菌可通过pH响应性递送系统定向富集于肿瘤组织,其分泌的免疫调节因子可协同阻断程序性死亡配体1(programmed death-ligand 1,PD-L1)信号通路,在临床前模型中使转移灶体积减少[28]。该策略为改善术后免疫微环境提供了潜在干预靶点,未来可探索此类疗法在术后辅助治疗中的协同作用,以进一步降低复发风险。
综上所述,机器人辅助腹腔镜下腔静脉节段性切除术是安全可行的,对肾功能没有重大影响,具有良好的肿瘤治疗效果。但由于本研究为单中心回顾性研究,且病例数量相对较少,其所报告的结果仅反映了单中心的初步经验,在不同规模和经验的手术团队中,可推广性可能会有所不同。因此,将来还需要扩大样本量在多机构中进行进一步的研究,尤其需整合肾功能相关危险因素(如高龄、慢性肾脏病、高血压及糖尿病等)进行分层分析。

利益冲突  所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突。

作者贡献声明  刘茁、张树栋:提出研究思路;刘帅、刘茁、张树栋:设计研究方案;刘帅、管允鹤、王国良、田晓军、张洪宪、刘磊、马潞林、张树栋:收集、分析、整理数据;刘帅、刘茁:撰写论文;刘茁、张树栋:总体把关和审定论文。

1
Bray F , Laversanne M , Sung H , et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2024, 74 (3): 229- 263.

2
Liu Z , Zhang Q , Zhao X , et al. Inferior vena cava interruption in renal cell carcinoma with tumor thrombus: Surgical strategy and perioperative results[J]. BMC Surg, 2021, 21 (1): 402.

3
Hirono M , Kobayashi M , Tsushima T , et al. Impacts of clinicopathologic and operative factors on short-term and long-term survi-val in renal cell carcinoma with venous tumor thrombus extension: A multi-institutional retrospective study in Japan[J]. BMC Can-cer, 2013, 13, 447.

4
Zhang R , Liu Z , Zhang M , et al. The value of a postoperative nomogram based on the primary tumor score for overall survival of patients with renal cell carcinoma and inferior vena cava tumor thrombus[J]. Urol Oncol, 2025, 43 (3): 190.e21- 190.e28.

5
Wang S , Gaurab P , Cui J , et al. Impact of left renal vein ligation on renal function following en bloc resection of segmental inferior vena cava and right kidney[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2024, 31 (7): 4787- 4794.

6
叶剑飞, 马潞林, 赵磊, 等. 腔静脉节段切除术在处理侵犯腔静脉的肾肿瘤瘤栓中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50 (1): 183- 187.

DOI

7
刘茁, 王国良, 田晓军, 等. 下腔静脉节段性切除术在肾癌伴下腔静脉癌栓中的应用[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2018, 23 (9): 677- 681.

8
Du S , Huang Q , Yu H , et al. Initial series of robotic segmental inferior vena cava resection in left renal cell carcinoma with caval tumor thrombus[J]. Urology, 2020, 142, 125- 132.

9
Otaola-Arca H , Krebs A , Bermúdez H , et al. Long-term oncological and functional outcomes after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2022, 29 (4): 2484- 2494.

10
Adams LC , Ralla B , Bender YY , et al. Renal cell carcinoma with venous extension: Prediction of inferior vena cava wall invasion by MRI[J]. Cancer Imaging, 2018, 18 (1): 17.

11
Blute ML , Leibovich BC , Lohse CM , et al. The Mayo clinic experience with surgical management, complications and outcome for patients with renal cell carcinoma and venous tumour thrombus[J]. BJU Int, 2004, 94 (1): 33- 41.

12
Paner GP , Stadler WM , Hansel DE , et al. Updates in the eighth edition of the tumor-node-metastasis staging classification for urologic cancers[J]. Eur Urol, 2018, 73 (4): 560- 569.

13
Mitropoulos D , Artibani W , Biyani CS , et al. Validation of the Clavien-Dindo grading system in urology by the European Association of Urology Guidelines Ad Hoc Panel[J]. Eur Urol Focus, 2018, 4 (4): 608- 613.

14
赵勋, 颜野, 黄晓娟, 等. 癌栓粘连血管壁对非转移性肾细胞癌合并下腔静脉癌栓患者手术及预后的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53 (4): 665- 670.

DOI

15
Xie L , Hong G , Nabavizadeh R , et al. Outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma undergoing inferior vena cava ligation without reconstruction versus thrombectomy: A retrospective, case controlled study[J]. J Urol, 2021, 205 (2): 383- 391.

16
Kaneko J , Hayashi Y , Kazami Y , et al. Resection and reconstruction of the largest abdominal vein system (the inferior vena cava, hepatic, and portal vein): A narrative review[J]. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2024, 9, 23.

17
Liu Z , Zhao X , Zhang HX , et al. Peking University Third Hospital score: A comprehensive system to predict intra-operative blood loss in radical nephrectomy and thrombectomy[J]. Chin Med J (Engl), 2020, 133 (10): 1166- 1174.

18
Zini L , Destrieux-Garnier L , Leroy X , et al. Renal vein ostium wall invasion of renal cell carcinoma with an inferior vena cava tumor thrombus: Prediction by renal and vena caval vein diameters and prognostic significance[J]. J Urol, 2008, 179 (2): 450- 454.

19
Gohji K , Yamashita C , Ueno K , et al. Preoperative computerized tomography detection of extensive invasion of the inferior vena cava by renal cell carcinoma: Possible indication for resection with partial cardiopulmonary bypass and patch grafting[J]. J Urol, 1994, 152 (6 Pt 1): 1993- 1996.

20
Li QY , Li N , Huang QB , et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in detecting wall invasion and differentiating bland from tumor thrombus during robot-assisted inferior vena cava thrombectomy for renal cell carcinoma[J]. Cancer Imaging, 2019, 19 (1): 79.

21
Dason S , Mohebal J , Blute ML , et al. Surgical management of renal cell carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus[J]. Urol Clin North Am, 2023, 50 (2): 261- 284.

22
Gu L , Peng C , Li H , et al. Neoadjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma with tumor thrombus: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol, 2024, 196, 104316.

23
Chopra S , Simone G , Metcalfe C , et al. Robot-assisted level Ⅱ-Ⅲ inferior vena cava tumor thrombectomy: Step-by-step technique and 1-year outcomes[J]. Euro Urol, 2017, 72 (2): 267- 274.

24
Gu L , Ma X , Gao Y , et al. Robotic versus open level Ⅰ-Ⅱ inferior vena cava thrombectomy: A matched group comparative ana-lysis[J]. J Urol, 2017, 198 (6): 1241- 1246.

25
Wang B , Li H , Ma X , et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic inferior vena cava thrombectomy: Different sides require different techniques[J]. Euro Urol, 2016, 69 (6): 1112- 1119.

26
Wang B , Huang Q , Liu K , et al. Robot-assisted level Ⅲ-Ⅳ inferior vena cava thrombectomy: Initial series with step-by-step procedures and 1-yr outcomes[J]. Euro Urol, 2020, 78 (1): 77- 86.

27
Zheng C , Zhang D , Kong Y , et al. Dynamic regulation of drug biodistribution by turning tumors into decoys for biomimetic nanoplatform to enhance the chemotherapeutic efficacy of breast cancer with bone metastasis[J]. Exploration (Beijing), 2023, 3 (4): 20220124.

28
Guo L , Chen H , Ding J , et al. Surface engineering Salmonella with pH-responsive polyserotonin and self-activated DNAzyme for better microbial therapy of tumor[J]. Exploration (Beijing), 2023, 3 (6): 20230017.

文章导航

/