RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • KCI등재

        Prognostic Impact of the Metastatic Lymph Node Ratio on Survival in Rectal Cancer

        Wafi Attaallah,Omer Gunal,Manuk Manukyan,Gulden Ozden,Cumhur Yegen 대한대장항문학회 2013 Annals of Coloproctolgy Vol.29 No.3

        Purpose: Lymph-node metastasis is the most important predictor of survival in stage III rectal cancer. The number of metastatic lymph nodes may vary depending on the level of specimen dissection and the total number of lymph nodes harvested. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the lymph node ratio (LNR) is a prognostic parameter for patients with rectal cancer. Methods: A retrospective review of a database of rectal cancer patients was performed to determine the effect of the LNR on the disease-free survival (DFS) and the overall survival. Of the total 228 patients with rectal cancer, 55 patients with stage III cancer were eligible for analysis. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analyses, after adjustments for potential confounders, were used to evaluate the relationship between the LNR and survival. Results: According to the cutoff point 0.15 (15%), the 2-year DFS was 95.2% among patients with a LNR < 0.15 compared with 67.6% for those with LNR ≥ 0.15 (P = 0.02). In stratified and multivariate analyses adjusted for age, gender, histology and tumor status, a higher LNR was independently associated with worse DFS. Conclusion: This study showed the prognostic significance of ratio-based staging for rectal cancer and may help in developing better staging systems. LNR 0.15 (15%) was shown to be a cutoff point for determining survival and prognosis in rectal cancer cases.

      • KCI등재

        The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

        Ugur Deveci,Umut Barbaros,Mahmut Sertan Kapakli,Manuk Norayk Manukyan,Selcuk ?im?ek,Abut Kebudi,Selcuk Mercan 대한외과학회 2013 Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research(ASRT) Vol.85 No.6

        Purpose: Laparoscopic techniques have allowed surgeons to perform complicated intra-abdominal surgery with minimal trauma. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was developed with the aim of reducing the invasiveness of conventional laparoscopy. In this study we aimed to compare results of SILS cholecystectomy and three port conventional laparoscopic (TPCL) cholecystectomy prospectively. Methods: In this prospective study, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease were randomly allocated to SILS cholecystectomy (group 1) or TPCL cholecystectomy (group 2). Demographics, pathologic diagnosis, operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, pain score, conversion rate, and satisfaction of cosmetic outcome were recorded. Results: Forty-four SILS cholesystectomies (88%) and 42 TPCL cholecystectomies (84%) were completed successfully. Conversion to open surgery was required for 4 cases in group 1 and 6 cases in group 2. Operating time was significantly longer in group 1 compared with group 2 (73 minutes vs. 48 minutes; P < 0.05). Higher pain scores were observed in group 1 versus group 2 in postoperative day 1 (P < 0.05). There was higher cosmetic satisfaction in group 1 (P < 0.05). Conclusion: SILS cholecystectomy performed by experienced surgeons is at least as successful, feasible, effective and safe as a TPCL cholecystectomy. Surgeons performing SILS should have a firm foundation of advanced minimal access surgical skills and a cautious, gradated approach to attempt the various procedures. Prospective randomized studies comparing single access versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with large volumes and long-term followup, are needed to confirm our initial experience. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT01772745.)

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼