Clinical analysis of different surgical modalities for the treatment of congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a single-center retrospective study

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2024.01.003

Objective

To explore the clinical effect of different surgical methods in the treatment of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH).

Methods

From January 2013 to August 2023, retrospectively analysis was performed for the clinical data of 158 hospitalized children with CDH admitted to the Children′s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. According to different surgical methods and approaches, they were divided into thoracotomy group-1 (n=7), laparotomy group-1 (n=61), thoracoscopic group-1 (n=85) and laparoscopic group-1 (n=5). 12 patients underwent endoscopic conversion and 7 died after surgery. Excluding 19 patients with CDH who died after the first CDH repair and underwent endoscopy conversion, 139 children with CDH were further divided into thoracotomy group-2 (n=6), laparotomy group-2 (n=58), thoracoscopic group-2 (n=71) and laparoscopic group-2 (n=4). The above groups were compared with regards to age of operation, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incidence of blood transfusion, retention time of postoperative thoracic drainage tube, duration of postoperative ventilator use, hospitalization days, postoperative pulmonary complications and CDH recurrence by retrospective analysis with Kruskal-Wallis H test and chi-square test. The procedures followed in this study have been approved by the Ethics Committee of our hospital (Approval No. 2024-39).

Results

The overall mortality rate of CDH patients was 5.1% (8/158). 12 cases converted open surgery, including 3 cases converted to thoracotomy and 8 cases converted to laparotomy in thoracoscopic group-1, and 1 case converted to laparotomy in laparoscopic group-1. The operative time and intraoperative blood loss were compared among thoracotomy group-2, laparotomy group-2, thoracoscopic group-2 and laparoscopic group-2, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative blood transfusion, the duration of postoperative ventilator use, retention time of postoperative thoracic drainage tube and the days of hospitalization among those four groups (P>0.05). Pulmonary complications were observed in 9 cases (6.5%), including pneumothorax (4 cases in laparotomy group-2 and 5 cases in thoracoscopic group-2). There were 3 cases (2.2%) of chylothorax (1 case in laparotomy group-2 and 2 cases in thoracoscopic group-2). 2 cases (1.4%) of atelectasis were in laparotomy group-2. The differences of incidence rates of pneumothorax, chylothorax, and atelectasis among those four group all were not statistically significant (P>0.05). Follow-up results showed that there were 7 cases (5.0%) of CDH recurrence, and there was no statistical significance among those four groups in incidence of CDH recurrence (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Different operative methods for children with CDH are safe and effective, and each has its own advantages and disadvantages. The choice of operative methods should take into account the patient′s condition, the surgeon′s technical characteristics and the operative conditions. Open surgery still plays an important role in treatment of CDH children, but thoracoscopic minimally invasive surgery has become the preferred method for CDH children.

Key words: Hernias, diaphragmatic, congenital, Thoracotomy, Laparotomy, Thoracoscopes, Laparoscope, Surgical procedures, operative, Child

表1 开胸组-1、开腹组-1、胸腔镜组-1、腹腔镜组-1 CDH患儿手术时月龄、死亡率及中转开放手术率比较

组别	例数	手术时月龄[月，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	死亡率[例数(%)]	中转开放手术率[例数(%)]
开胸组-1	7	0.2(0.1，8.3)	1(14.3)	－^a
开腹组-1	61	0.7(0.1，8.2)	3(4.9)	－^a
胸腔镜组-1	85	5.7(0.2，12.8)	4(4.7)	11(12.9)
腹腔镜组-1	5	17.0(11.0，22.0)	0(0)	1(20.0)
统计量		H＝14.07	χ²＝1.22	χ²＝0.20
P值		0.003	0.638	0.520

表1 开胸组-1、开腹组-1、胸腔镜组-1、腹腔镜组-1 CDH患儿手术时月龄、死亡率及中转开放手术率比较

组别	例数	手术时月龄[月，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	死亡率[例数(%)]	中转开放手术率[例数(%)]
开胸组-1	7	0.2(0.1，8.3)	1(14.3)	－^a
开腹组-1	61	0.7(0.1，8.2)	3(4.9)	－^a
胸腔镜组-1	85	5.7(0.2，12.8)	4(4.7)	11(12.9)
腹腔镜组-1	5	17.0(11.0，22.0)	0(0)	1(20.0)
统计量		H＝14.07	χ²＝1.22	χ²＝0.20
P值		0.003	0.638	0.520

表2 开胸组-2、开腹组-2、胸腔镜组-2、腹腔镜组-2 CDH患儿手术相关情况比较

组别	例数	手术时间[min，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	术中出血量[mL，M(Q₁，Q₃))	术中输血率[例数(%)]	术后胸腔引流管留置时间[d，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	术后呼吸机使用时间[d，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	住院天数[d，M(Q₁，Q₃)]
开胸组-2	6	82.5(71.7，95.0)	6.3(3.5，10.0)	0(0)	0.5(0.2，1.0)	0.5(0.2，1.0)	15.5(13.0，20.0)
开腹组-2	58	85.9(72.5，101.0)	5.0(3.1，8.9)	5(8.6)	5.4(3.1，10.5)	1.0(0.6，4.0)	17.2(13.4，22.2)
胸腔镜组-2	71	64.4(50.2，86.1)	2.1(1.3，3.2)	4(5.6)	5.0(3.4，8.1)	1.0(0.2，3.2)	15.3(12.3，20.4)
腹腔镜组-2	4	110.0(70.0，243.3)	7.5(3.0，15.0)	0(0)	0(0，0)	0.5(0.4，0.7)	15.0(5.0，17.7)
统计量		H＝21.15	H＝36.42	χ²＝0.77	H＝3.85	H＝5.81	H＝2.41
P值		<0.001	<0.001	0.865	0.278	0.121	0.492

表2 开胸组-2、开腹组-2、胸腔镜组-2、腹腔镜组-2 CDH患儿手术相关情况比较

组别	例数	手术时间[min，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	术中出血量[mL，M(Q₁，Q₃))	术中输血率[例数(%)]	术后胸腔引流管留置时间[d，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	术后呼吸机使用时间[d，M(Q₁，Q₃)]	住院天数[d，M(Q₁，Q₃)]
开胸组-2	6	82.5(71.7，95.0)	6.3(3.5，10.0)	0(0)	0.5(0.2，1.0)	0.5(0.2，1.0)	15.5(13.0，20.0)
开腹组-2	58	85.9(72.5，101.0)	5.0(3.1，8.9)	5(8.6)	5.4(3.1，10.5)	1.0(0.6，4.0)	17.2(13.4，22.2)
胸腔镜组-2	71	64.4(50.2，86.1)	2.1(1.3，3.2)	4(5.6)	5.0(3.4，8.1)	1.0(0.2，3.2)	15.3(12.3，20.4)
腹腔镜组-2	4	110.0(70.0，243.3)	7.5(3.0，15.0)	0(0)	0(0，0)	0.5(0.4，0.7)	15.0(5.0，17.7)
统计量		H＝21.15	H＝36.42	χ²＝0.77	H＝3.85	H＝5.81	H＝2.41
P值		<0.001	<0.001	0.865	0.278	0.121	0.492

表3 开胸组-2、开腹组-2、胸腔镜组-2、腹腔镜组-2 CDH患儿术后肺部相关并发症发生率及CDH复发率比较

组别	例数	肺不张[例数(%)]	气胸[例数(%)]	乳糜胸[例数(%)]	CDH复发[例数(%)]	CDH复发时间间隔[M(Q₁，Q₃)]
开胸亚组-2	6	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	－^a
开腹亚组-2	58	2(3.45)	4(6.9)	1(1.7)	0(0)	－^a
胸腔镜亚组-2	71	0(0)	5(7.0)	2(2.8)	7(9.9)	5.0(2.0，7.0)
腹腔镜亚组-2	4	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	－^a
χ²值		4.20	0.34	1.72	6.75	－^a
P值		0.312	0.952	0.632	0.068	－^a

表3 开胸组-2、开腹组-2、胸腔镜组-2、腹腔镜组-2 CDH患儿术后肺部相关并发症发生率及CDH复发率比较

组别	例数	肺不张[例数(%)]	气胸[例数(%)]	乳糜胸[例数(%)]	CDH复发[例数(%)]	CDH复发时间间隔[M(Q₁，Q₃)]
开胸亚组-2	6	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	－^a
开腹亚组-2	58	2(3.45)	4(6.9)	1(1.7)	0(0)	－^a
胸腔镜亚组-2	71	0(0)	5(7.0)	2(2.8)	7(9.9)	5.0(2.0，7.0)
腹腔镜亚组-2	4	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	0(0)	－^a
χ²值		4.20	0.34	1.72	6.75	－^a
P值		0.312	0.952	0.632	0.068	－^a

[1]	Politis MD, Bermejo-Sánchez E, Canfield MA, et al. Prevalence and mortality in children with congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a multicountry study[J]. Ann Epidemiol, 2021, 56: 61.e3-69.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2020.11.007.
[2]	Zani A, Chung WK, Deprest J, et al. Congenital diaphragmatic hernia[J]. Nat Rev Dis Primers, 2022, 8(1): 37. DOI: 10.1038/s41572-022-00362-w.
[3]	Cicero G, Mazziotti S, Blandino A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the diaphragm: from normal to pathologic findings[J]. J Clin Imaging Sci, 2020, 10: 1. DOI: 10.25259/JCIS_138_2019.
[4]	Chatterjee D, Ing RJ, Gien J. Update on congenital diaphragmatic hernia[J]. Anesth Analg, 2020, 131(3): 808-821. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004324.
[5]	De Bie FR, Avitabile CM, Joyeux L, et al. Neonatal and fetal therapy of congenital diaphragmatic hernia-related pulmonary hypertension[J]. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 2022, 107(5): 458-466. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2021-322617.
[6]	Silen ML, Canvasser DA, Kurkchubasche AG, et al. Video-assisted thoracic surgical repair of a foramen of Bochdalek hernia[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 1995, 60(2): 448-450. DOI: 10.1016/0003-4975(95)00100-y.
[7]	van der Zee DC, Bax NM. Laparoscopic repair of congenital diaphragmatic hernia in a 6-month-old child[J]. Surg Endosc, 1995, 9(9): 1001-1003. DOI: 10.1007/BF00188460.
[8]	何秋明，钟微，吕俊健，等. 高频振荡通气下胸腔镜补片修补巨大先天性膈疝一例并文献复习[J]. 中华小儿外科杂志，2019，40(9): 806-810. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3006.2019.09.008.
[9]	魏延栋，马立霜，王莹，等. 胸腔镜手术治疗先天性膈疝的经验及技术要点分析[J]. 临床小儿外科杂志，2021, 20(9): 819-824. DOI: 10.12260/lcxewkzz.2021.09.004.
[10]	Suply E, Rees C, Cross K, et al. Patch repair of congenital diaphragmatic hernia is not at risk of poor outcomes[J]. J Pediatr Surg, 2020, 55(8): 1522-1527. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.10.021.
[11]	胡明哲，李军，朱海涛，等. 新生儿先天性膈疝术后复发危险因素分析及治疗[J]. 广东医学，2021, 42(1): 32-36. DOI: 10.13820/j.cnki.gdyx.20201075.
[12]	赵萍，刘翔，左伟，等. 胸腔镜手术治疗新生儿先天性膈疝复发的影响因素分析及其对复发膈疝的治疗效果[J]. 临床小儿外科杂志，2021, 20(2): 153-160. DOI: 10.12260/lcxewkzz.2021.02.009.

[1]	Shuying Zhao, Dan Zhang. Progress and development trend of laparoscopic surgical treatment for gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 459-462.
[2]	Yexin Shi, Xiang Ma, Ming Lu, Qingcheng Xia, Pengchao Wang, Qingyu Song, Qinghong Zhao. Research progress of colorectal tumor localization under laparoscopy[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 463-466.
[3]	Nan Zhu, Feng Shen. Laparoscopic hemihepatectomy[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 367-367.
[4]	Lianxin Liu, Shugeng Zhang. Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy combined with left caudate resection[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 368-368.
[5]	Chaoliu Dai, Yang Zhao. Several issues should be emphasized in laparoscopic anatomical liver resection[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 359-362.
[6]	Xiaoou Li, Heming Yang, Guodong Wang, Haiguan Lin, Jianwu Yang. Comparison of curative effects of laparoscopic radical resection of left colon cancer by different approaches[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 377-380.
[7]	Yixiang Zhang, Ming Ma, Jinlong Tian, Shanshan Yang, Chengcheng Shang, Jingxin Zhang. Clinical observation on laparoscopic liver lobectomy combined with choledochoscopy in the treatment of intrahepatic bile duct stones[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 381-384.
[8]	Yan Chen. Curative effect of LCBDE and ERCP+EST on cholecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 385-388.
[9]	Wenjin Chen, Yuejun Zhang, Chuantai Wang. Study on the influencing factors of intestinal obstruction after laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 389-392.
[10]	Shunfu Ji, Xiaoyan Tang, Jin Xu. Application of expanding retrogastric space in obese patients during laparoscopic radical resection of proximal gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 393-396.
[11]	Jin Ji, Shengwen Wu, Mingrui Jiang, Liuhua Wang, Wei Wang, Jun Ren, Daorong Wang, Congchao Ma. Comparative study of three methods of pelvic floor closure combined with improved ostomy in combined abdominoperineal resection of rectal cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 406-410.
[12]	Qian Guo, Xiaofeng Zhang, Peng Zhang, Wenbo Su. The study of "four-step" dissection of lymph node No.253 in radical resection of rectal cancer with LCA preservation[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 411-414.
[13]	Chengyu Shi, Xiaolin Ji, Liying Tian, Laixiang Zhang. Clinical effect of 14c/d group lymph node dissection during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 430-433.
[14]	Longfeng Sun, Gaofeng Hou, Youli Wang, Lei Liu. Selection of SMA or SMV approach during laparoscopic D3 radical resection of right colon cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 438-441.
[15]	Liankui Song, Jiancheng Wang, Zhulin Wang, Chunsheng Wang, Hongwei Mu, Hongge Ji. Comparison of clinical effects of TAPP and TEP in the treatment of inguinal hernia[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(04): 445-447.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export