• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Hepatic resection vs percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma abutting right diaphragm

    2019-04-20 01:35:52KyoungDooSongHyoKeunLimHyunchulRhimMinWooLeeTaeWookKangYongHanPaikJongManKimJaeWonJoh
    關(guān)鍵詞:客觀性成巖狀況

    Kyoung Doo Song,Hyo Keun Lim,Hyunchul Rhim,Min Woo Lee,Tae Wook Kang,Yong Han Paik,Jong Man Kim,Jae-Won Joh

    Kyoung Doo Song,Hyunchul Rhim,Min Woo Lee,Tae Wook Kang,Department of Radiology,Samsung Medical Center,Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine,Seoul 06351,South Korea

    Hyo Keun Lim,Department of Radiology,Samsung Medical Center,Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine,Department of Health Sciences and Technology,SAIHST,Sungkyunkwan University,Seoul 06351,South Korea

    Yong Han Paik,Department of Medicine,Samsung Medical Center,Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine,Seoul 06351,South Korea

    Jong Man Kim,Jae-Won Joh,Department of Surgery,Samsung Medical Center,Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine,Seoul 06351,South Korea

    Abstract

    Key words: Hepatic resection;Radiofrequency ablation;Hepatocellular carcinoma;Diaphragm;Treatment outcome

    INTRODUCTION

    Both hepatic resection and radiofrequency (RF) ablation are considered curative procedures for very early or early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)[1].Many studies have revealed that RF ablation is comparable to hepatic resection in terms of long-term survival for patients with early-stage HCC[2-4].However,most studies have not taken into account the location of HCCs.Tumor location is an important factor affecting local tumor control especially for RF ablation due to its technical complexity[5].

    When an HCC is located in the liver abutting the right diaphragm,an adequate accomplishment of percutaneous ultrasound (US)-guided RF ablation is difficult due to the poor sonic window resulting from lung shadowing and the potential risk of collateral thermal injury to the diaphragm.According to a preliminary study,local tumor progression (LTP) after percutaneous RF ablation was more frequent in patients with subphrenic HCCs (29%) than in nonsubphrenic HCCs (6%)[6].To overcome this inherent limitation,many investigators have used the infusion of artificial ascites or pleural effusion.Several studies have reported that percutaneous RF ablation with infusion of artificial ascites or pleural effusion was safe and effective[7-10].However,the LTP rate after RF ablation for subphrenic HCCs remained high even with the application of these special techniques[9].The effect of the specific location of HCC on the long-term therapeutic outcomes after hepatic resection and RF ablation has not yet been investigated.Thus,the aim of this study was to compare the long-term therapeutic outcomes of hepatic resectionvspercutaneous RF ablation for the curative treatment of HCCs abutting the diaphragm.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Our Institutional Review Board approved this retrospective study,and informed consent was waived.

    Patients

    Between January 2006 and October 2010,5981 patients were diagnosed with HCC at our institution.This study included patients from the same population as in a previous study that was conducted at our institution;however,the study design and result analysis methods are different[11].Inclusion criteria for our study were as follows:(1) patients who had undergone percutaneous US-guided RF ablation or hepatic resection for HCC as a first-line treatment;(2) patients who had a single HCC≤ 3 cm;(3) patients with HCC abutting the right diaphragm (subphrenic HCC);and(4) patients with Child-Pugh class A.A subphrenic HCC in our study was defined as a tumor that abutted the right diaphragm on axial or coronal images of computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging.We excluded tumors that abutted the left diaphragm because they are different from the tumors abutting the right diaphragm in many ways,in terms of treatment.Most tumors abutting the left diaphragm are located under the heart and are,hence,considered more technically difficult to treat compared to those close to the right diaphragm.In addition,the use of artificial ascites or pleural effusion is usually ineffective for tumors abutting the left diaphragm.Instead,hepatic resection of tumors abutting the left diaphragm(especially in the left lateral segment) is easily performed either after laparotomy or with a laparoscopic approach.Finally,our study included 63 patients (49 men,14 women;mean age,60.3 years;range,41-78 years) who had undergone percutaneous RF ablation and 80 patients (62 men,18 women;mean age,53.5 years;range,30-78 years) who had been treated with hepatic resection.The patient inclusion flowchart is shown in Figure 1.

    In 3 (4.7%) patients in the RF ablation group,HCC was confirmed histologically via percutaneous US-guided biopsy.In the remainder of the patients in the RF ablation group,HCC was diagnosed based on one of two clinical guidelines from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases at the time of RF ablation[1,12].For all patients in the hepatic resection group,HCC was diagnosed histologically after hepatic resection.

    Treatment of HCC and follow-up

    The general inclusion criteria for hepatic resection at our institution were as follows:(1) a single tumor or oligonodular tumors within a monosegment of the liver;(2) an indocyanine green retention rate less than 20% at 15 min;(3) serum total bilirubin level less than 1.5 mg/dL;(4) no severe portal hypertension;and (5) no gross ascites.The inclusion criteria for percutaneous RF ablation at our institution were as follows:(1) a single tumor (≤ 5 cm in the greatest dimension) or multiple nodular tumors(three or fewer,each ≤ 3 cm in the greatest dimension);(2) Child-Pugh class A or B disease;(3) no evidence of portal vein thrombosis or extrahepatic metastasis;and (4)prothrombin time ratio > 50%,and platelet count > 50000/mm3(50 × 109/L).Treatment modality was decided based on age,liver function reserve,tumor location,surgical risk,and patient preference by a multidisciplinary tumor board composed of hepatologists,radiologists,surgeons,and medical and radiation oncologists.

    Hepatic resection was performed by one of two surgeons (JHK and JWJ) with more than 10 years of experience in hepatobiliary surgery by the end of the study.The types of hepatic resection were as follows:subsegmentectomy in 58 patients,bisegmentectomy in five patients,posterior sectionectomy in 12 patients,right hemihepatectomy in two patients,anterior sectionectomy in one patient,central hepatectomy in one patient,and extended left hemihepatectomy in one patient.As a result,anatomical resection was performed in 17 (21.3%) patients and non-anatomical resection was performed in 63 (78.8%) patients[13].Hepatic resection was performed after laparotomy in 78 (97.5%) patients and with laparoscopy in two (2.5%) patients.RF ablation was performed by one of five interventional radiologists (MWL,DC,HR,HKL,and YK) with more than 6 years of experience in RF ablation by the end of the study.The process and method of RF ablation were the same as those described in a previous study[14].In brief,RF ablation was performed percutaneously under the guidance of real-time US.We used internally cooled electrode systems with generators (Cool-tip RF System,Covidien,Mansfield,MA,United States;or VIVA RFA System,STARmed,Goyang,South Korea).Sedation was performed via an intravenous injection of pethidine hydrochloride (Samsung Pharmaceuticals,Seoul,South Korea) and fentanyl citrate (GUJU Pharma,Seoul,South Korea).To improve the sonic window and avoid thermal injury to the diaphragm,artificial ascites (5%dextrose in a water solution) was infused into the perihepatic space using a 5F angiosheath in 39 (61.9%) patients.

    Figure1 Flowchart of patient inclusion.HCC:Hepatocellular carcinoma;RF:Radiofrequency.

    After RF ablation,immediate follow-up contrast agent-enhanced CT was performed to evaluate the therapeutic response and possible complications.Contrast agent-enhanced CT was performed at the 1 mo follow-up,every 3 mo during the first 2 years,followed by every 4-6 mo according to the risk of recurrence for both the hepatic resection group and RF ablation group.

    應用地積累指數(shù)法(Igeo)評價土壤重金屬污染程度時,除考慮了當?shù)丨h(huán)境背景值、人為活動之外,還考慮到巖石自然成巖作用對當?shù)乇尘爸邓鶐淼淖儎佑绊?。因此,應用該方法評價土壤重金屬污染狀況時具有相對的客觀性,可以作為評價工業(yè)活動(如礦業(yè)開采選冶等)產(chǎn)生的土壤重金屬污染狀況的定量指標[10]。

    Data acquisition

    Baseline characteristics of patients and HCCs were obtained through review of their electronic medical record from our institution.To compare the therapeutic outcomes between the two groups,intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR),disease-free survival(DFS),and overall survival (OS) were calculated.IDR was defined as a new tumor appearing in the liver separate from the treated area.DFS was defined as the time interval from the date of treatment to one of the following events:intrahepatic recurrence,extrahepatic recurrence,or death.OS was defined as the time interval from the date of treatment to death.If the patients had undergone liver transplantation,they were considered to have been censored at the time of liver transplantation.Complications were stratified according to the Clavien classification of postoperative complications,and complications of grade II or higher were considered major complications[15].Local tumor progression (LTP) was evaluated for the RF ablation group.LTP was defined as the appearance of new tumor foci at the margin of the ablation zone after at least one contrast-enhanced follow-up study had demonstrated an absence of viable tumors[16].

    Statistical analysis

    Continuous data were compared using two-samplettests,and categorical variables were compared using chi-squared tests between the two groups.Cumulative LTP,cumulative IDR,DFS,and OS rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.Prognostic factors for DFS and OS were assessed using Cox regression models.Proportional hazard (PH) assumption for the Cox proportional hazard model was tested using Schoenfeld’s method.For the variables with violation of PH assumption,the time-dependent Cox regression was applied.When the time dependence was not significant,the Cox proportional hazard model was applied.Possible risk factors withPvalues of 0.1 or less at univariate analyses were entered into the multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.Subgroup analysis for patients with ≤ 2 cm HCCs was performed with Cox proportional hazard models.All statistical analyses were performed using a software (PASW statistical software,version 18.0;SPSS,Chicago,IL).For all tests,aPvalue < 0.05 was defined as a significant difference.

    RESULTS

    Baseline characteristics of patients and HCCs are shown in Table 1.The median follow-up period was 74.9 mo (range,10.3-117.8 mo) in the hepatic resection group and 65.3 mo (range,4.1-113.9 mo) in the RF ablation group.The RF ablation group was significantly older,and they exhibited a lower α-fetoprotein level,platelet count,and serum albumin level,and a higher prothrombin time.In the RF ablation group,the proportion of patients with liver cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus was higher and the proportion of patients with hepatitis B virus was lower compared to that in the hepatic resection group.The mean size of HCCs was not significantly different between the two groups.

    Therapeutic outcomes

    The cumulative IDR rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 15.0%,29.1%,and 35.9%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 13.1%,54.5%,and 65.8%,respectively,for the RF ablation group (Figure 2A).The estimated DFS rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 85.0%,70.9%,and 64.1%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 69.5%,27.5%,and 18.3%,respectively,for the RF ablation group (Figure 2B).The estimated OS rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 97.5%,92.3%,and 88.4%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 100%,81.4%,and 68.7%,respectively,for the RF ablation group (Figure 2C).For the RF ablation group,the cumulative LTP rates were 22.5%,37.8%,and 46.6% at 1-,3-,and 5-years,respectively (Figure 3).

    Analysis of risk factors

    Based on multivariate analysis,there was no in dependent prognostic factor for OS.Hepatic resection [P≤ 0.001;hazard ratio (HR),0.352;95% confidence interval (CI):0.205,0.605;with RFA as the reference category],alanine aminotransferase level (P=0.006;HR,1.011;95%CI:1.003,1.020),and serum albumin level (P= 0.014;HR,0.481;95%CI:0.269,0.860) were independent prognostic factors for DFS (Tables 2 and 3).

    Subgroup analysis for patients with ≤ 2 cm HCC

    Thirty-seven patients in the hepatic resection group and 27 patients in the RF ablation group had ≤ 2 cm HCC.The cumulative IDR rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 13.5%,27.3%,and 33.1%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 15.3%,60.3%,and 70.2%,respectively,for the RF ablation group.The estimated DFS rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 86.5%,72.7%,and 66.9%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 81.0%,27.4%,and 18.3%,respectively,for the RF ablation group.The estimated OS rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 100%,94.5%,and 91.7%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 100%,83.8%,and 65.4%,respectively,for the RF ablation group.In multivariate analysis,hepatic resection was an independent prognostic factor for DFS (P= 0.018;HR,0.365;CI:0.158-0.844),but was not an independent prognostic factor for OS.

    Complications and treatment for recurrent HCC

    There was no treatment-related mortality in either group.Major complications occurred in three patients (3.8%) in the hepatic resection group:Grade II,pneumonia(n= 1) and intraperitoneal hemorrhage (n= 1);and Grade III,wound infection requiring surgery (n= 1).In the RF ablation group,a major complication occurred in one patient (1.6%):Grade III,pleural effusion requiring drainage.The major complication rate was not significantly different between the two groups (P= 0.060).The posttreatment hospital stay was significantly longer in the hepatic resection group (median,9 d;range,5-23 d) than in the RF ablation group (median,1.0 d;range,1-4 d;P <0.001).

    During the follow-up period,peritoneal seeding occurred in one patient (1.3%) in the hepatic resection group and six patients (9.5%) in the RF ablation group,and the rate of peritoneal seeding was significantly different (P= 0.044).

    During the follow-up period,LTP occurred in 29 (46.0%) of the 63 patients in the RF ablation group.The initial treatment modalities for LTP were as follows:transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) (n= 14),RF ablation (n= 12),hepatic resection (n= 1),combined TACE and RF ablation (n= 1),and combined TACE and radiation therapy(n= 1).In 26 of 29 patients,LTP was controlled with additional treatments,and the number of additional treatments was as follows:One (n= 17),two (n= 3),three (n=4),and six (n= 2).For the remaining three patients,LTP was not controlled even though they received repeated treatments with TACE or RF ablation.In addition,multiple intra- and extrahepatic metastases occurred.Finally,sorafenib treatment was administered.IDR occurred in 31 (38.8%) of the 80 patients in the hepatic resection group,and treatment modalities were as follows:TACE (n= 18),RF ablation (n= 11),cryoablation (n= 1),and hepatic resection (n= 1).IDR occurred in 42 (66.7%) of the 63patients in the RF ablation group,and treatment modalities were as follows:TACE (n= 16),RF ablation (n= 20),combined TACE and RF ablation (n= 3),hepatic resection(n= 1),liver transplantation (n= 1),and sorafenib treatment (n= 1).

    Table1 Baseline patient characteristics

    DISCUSSION

    In our study,we compared long-term therapeutic outcomes for treatments using hepatic resection and percutaneous RF ablation for HCCs (≤ 3 cm) abutting the right diaphragm;we found that the treatment modality was a significant prognostic factor for DFS,but was not an independent prognostic factor for OS.For the RF ablation group,the LTP rate was as high as 46.6% at 5 years.The location of tumors can affect the technical difficulty in local control of tumors,especially for RF ablation.Although there have been many studies that compared therapeutic outcomes between hepatic resection and RF ablation for HCC,most of them did not consider the location of tumors.In this way,the results of our study,which compares hepatic resection and percutaneous RF ablation for HCCs with consideration of the location of tumors,can provide important data for the proper management of HCCs abutting the diaphragm.

    In our study,the LTP rate was 46.6% at 5 years for the RF ablation group.The LTP rate was much higher than rates reported in previous studies that included all HCCs located in the liver[11,14,17-19].Percutaneous RF ablation for subphrenic HCCs is difficult to adequately perform for several reasons.First,the poor sonic window resulting from the lung shadow makes it difficult to accurately target tumors with the electrodes.Second,all tumors were subcapsular HCCs in our study.In general,subcapsular HCCs are considered to be more difficult to treat with percutaneous HCC than nonsubcapsular HCCs because of the difficulty of placing an electrode and not being able to obtain enough ablative margin along the hepatic capsule.

    In this study,patients who had undergone hepatic resection exhibited longer DFS compared to those who had undergone RF ablation.This result is in line with previous studies that compared DFS outcomes for hepatic resection and RF ablation for HCC[20,21].In our study,the estimated DFS rates at 1-,3-,and 5-years were 85.0%,70.9%,and 64.1%,respectively,for the hepatic resection group and 69.5%,27.5%,and 18.3%,respectively,for the RF ablation group.In the previous study at our institution that compared RF ablation with hepatic resection for single HCC ≤ 3 cm located in the liver,the estimated DFS rate at 5 years was 61.1% for the hepatic resection group and 31.7% for the RF ablation group[11].The DFS rate for the hepatic resection group of this study was similar to our previous result.However,the DFS rate for the RF ablation group of this study was lower than our previous result.This difference can most likely be explained by the high LTP rate for the RF ablation group in this study.

    Figure2 Cumulative intrahepatic distant recurrence rates (A),disease-free survival rates (B),and overall survival rates (C).IDR:Intrahepatic distant recurrence;RF:Radiofrequency.

    According to previous studies,RF ablation was comparable to hepatic resection for very early and early-stage HCCs in terms of OS[22-24].In our study,estimated OS rates for the hepatic resection group (97.5%,92.3%,and 88.4% at 1-,3-,and 5-years,respectively) appeared to be better than those for the RF ablation group (100%,81.4%,and 68.7% at 1-,3-,and 5-years).However,similar to previous studies,treatment modality was not an independent prognostic factor for OS according to multivariate analyses in our study.

    Figure3 Local tumor progression rate in the radiofrequency ablation group.LTP:Local tumor progression.

    Previous studies have reported comparable outcomes between RF ablation and hepatic resection in terms of long-term survival for patients with early-stage HCC.Based on these results,both hepatic resection and RF ablation are considered as curative treatment options for early stage HCC.Although treatment modality was not an independent prognostic factor for OS in patients with subphrenic HCCs,there were some differences in treatment outcomes between patients with subphrenic HCCs and nonsubphrenic HCCs that need to be considered when treatment modality is determined.First,the LTP rate after RF ablation was much higher for patients with subphrenic HCCs.Second,recurrent LTP was common in patients with subphrenic HCCs.In 12 (41%) of 29 patients who had LTP,multiple treatments were performed to control the LTP.Third,the peritoneal seeding rate for subphrenic HCCs was as high as 9.5% in the RF ablation group.Considering these unfavorable outcomes of RF ablation for subphrenic HCCs,it may be reasonable to preferentially consider hepatic resection as the first-line treatment for subphrenic HCCs rather than percutaneous RF ablation.Otherwise,laparoscopic RF ablation or combined TACE and RF ablation should be considered because these modalities can be more effective than percutaneous RF ablation alone in terms of local tumor control[25-27].However,this issue needs to be investigated further.

    Our study has some limitations.First,because this is a retrospective study,the treatment groups were not randomized,and we could not exclude the possibility of selection bias.However,we analyzed the effect of treatment modality (hepatic resectionvspercutaneous RF ablation) after controlling for potential compounding factors.Second,HCC was diagnosed based on clinical guidelines in most patients in the RF ablation group.Therefore,there was a possibility of false-positive diagnosis,which could affect the outcomes.Third,this is a single-center study.In general,the outcomes of both hepatic resection and RF ablation greatly depend on the expertise and experience of the operators.In addition,we only used the single straight type of RF electrode and US as a guiding modality.Using other types of RF electrodes or guiding modalities may result in different therapeutic outcomes.Therefore,care should be taken when generalizing our results to that from other institutions.

    In conclusion,although OS was not significantly different between patients who had undergone hepatic resection or percutaneous RF ablation for HCCs abutting the diaphragm,DFS was better in the hepatic resection group,and LTP was as high as 46.6% at 5 years in the RF ablation group.Therefore,it may be reasonable that hepatic resection should be preferentially considered over percutaneous US-guided RF ablation as a first-line treatment for HCCs abutting the diaphragm.

    Table2 Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for overall survival

    Table3 Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for disease-free survival

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research background

    Many studies have revealed that radiofrequency (RF) ablation is comparable to hepatic resection in terms of long-term survival for patients with early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).However,most studies have not taken into account the location of HCCs.

    Research motivation

    Our study attempted to analyze the effect of the subphrenic location of HCC on the long-term therapeutic outcomes after hepatic resection and RF ablation.

    Research objectives

    To compare the long-term therapeutic outcomes between hepatic resectionvspercutaneous RF ablation for HCCs abutting the diaphragm.

    Research methods

    A total of 143 Child-Pugh class A patients who had undergone hepatic resection (n= 80) or percutaneous RF ablation (n= 63) for an HCC (≤ 3 cm) abutting the right diaphragm were included.Therapeutic outcomes were compared.

    Research results

    Hepatic resection was an independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival (DFS) (P≤0.001;hazard ratio,0.352;95%CI:0.205,0.605;with RF ablation as the reference category);however,treatment modality was not an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS).The local tumor progression rate was 46.6% at 5 years for the RF ablation group.

    Research conclusions

    Although OS was not significantly different between patients who had undergone hepatic resection or percutaneous RF ablation for HCCs abutting the diaphragm,DFS was better in the hepatic resection group.

    Research perspectives

    Further studies with large sample size and multicenter prospective studies are needed to confirm the conclusion of this study.

    猜你喜歡
    客觀性成巖狀況
    聲敏感患者的焦慮抑郁狀況調(diào)查
    憲法解釋與實踐客觀性
    法律方法(2021年3期)2021-03-16 05:58:08
    2019年中國國際收支狀況依然會保持穩(wěn)健
    中國外匯(2019年13期)2019-10-10 03:37:38
    客觀性與解釋
    法律方法(2019年3期)2019-09-11 06:26:20
    能源領(lǐng)域中成巖作用的研究進展及發(fā)展趨勢
    實現(xiàn)“歷史解釋”多樣性與客觀性的統(tǒng)一
    第五節(jié) 2015年法學專業(yè)就業(yè)狀況
    論柴靜新聞采訪對客觀性的踐行
    新聞傳播(2016年4期)2016-07-18 10:59:23
    準中1區(qū)三工河組低滲儲層特征及成巖作用演化
    斷塊油氣田(2014年5期)2014-03-11 15:33:43
    “十五大”前夕的俄共組織狀況
    亚洲伊人色综图| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 嫩草影视91久久| www.自偷自拍.com| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 一区福利在线观看| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 国产成人欧美| 97在线人人人人妻| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 国产精品九九99| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| av不卡在线播放| av天堂在线播放| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 悠悠久久av| 人妻一区二区av| 中国美女看黄片| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 久久狼人影院| 电影成人av| 高清av免费在线| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲伊人色综图| 91成年电影在线观看| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 女警被强在线播放| 天天躁日日躁夜夜躁夜夜| 99久久人妻综合| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 桃花免费在线播放| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 一本久久精品| 国产又爽黄色视频| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| av视频免费观看在线观看| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 久久久国产一区二区| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 日本wwww免费看| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 黄色 视频免费看| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| cao死你这个sao货| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 午夜激情av网站| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| www.精华液| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 丁香六月天网| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 9色porny在线观看| 午夜视频精品福利| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 亚洲国产看品久久| 两性夫妻黄色片| 久久青草综合色| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 桃花免费在线播放| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 国产成人精品在线电影| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 午夜激情av网站| 久久av网站| 一区在线观看完整版| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 亚洲第一av免费看| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 午夜91福利影院| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 免费看十八禁软件| 91精品三级在线观看| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| www.精华液| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 无人区码免费观看不卡 | 国产精品国产av在线观看| 超色免费av| 久久久精品94久久精品| 91字幕亚洲| 成在线人永久免费视频| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 婷婷成人精品国产| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 国产男女内射视频| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区 | 国产成人精品在线电影| 高清在线国产一区| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 久久热在线av| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 国产在线观看jvid| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 桃花免费在线播放| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 久久免费观看电影| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 国产av国产精品国产| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 高清欧美精品videossex| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 亚洲av美国av| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 少妇 在线观看| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 欧美日韩精品网址| 色94色欧美一区二区| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 免费少妇av软件| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 搡老岳熟女国产| a在线观看视频网站| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| av一本久久久久| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 另类亚洲欧美激情| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 亚洲色图av天堂| 岛国毛片在线播放| 欧美大码av| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 考比视频在线观看| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 高清在线国产一区| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 考比视频在线观看| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 乱人伦中国视频| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 嫩草影视91久久| 久久精品成人免费网站| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 成人18禁在线播放| 美女午夜性视频免费| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲 | 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 国产不卡一卡二| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 亚洲色图av天堂| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频 | 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 黄频高清免费视频| 亚洲av成人一区二区三| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 两个人看的免费小视频| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕 | 两个人免费观看高清视频| 国产成人av教育| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 在线 av 中文字幕| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 黄片播放在线免费| 午夜福利欧美成人| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 在线观看www视频免费| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 中文字幕色久视频| 日本五十路高清| 91国产中文字幕| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 久久影院123| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 老司机靠b影院| 久久亚洲真实| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 国产av国产精品国产| 1024香蕉在线观看| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 国产单亲对白刺激| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 一区二区三区激情视频| 超色免费av| 9热在线视频观看99| 久久中文字幕一级| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| 精品少妇内射三级| av有码第一页| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看 | 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 丁香六月天网| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 老司机靠b影院| 超色免费av| av免费在线观看网站| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 国产在视频线精品| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 大香蕉久久网| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕 | 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| av免费在线观看网站| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 精品久久久精品久久久| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 美女福利国产在线| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 天堂动漫精品| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 丁香欧美五月| 免费不卡黄色视频| 色在线成人网| 大码成人一级视频| 久久狼人影院| svipshipincom国产片| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 色94色欧美一区二区| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 国产在线视频一区二区| 免费在线观看日本一区| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 我的亚洲天堂| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 91老司机精品| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 精品高清国产在线一区| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 免费观看av网站的网址| 不卡av一区二区三区| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 黄频高清免费视频| 手机成人av网站| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说 | 久久中文看片网| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 99国产精品99久久久久| 91成年电影在线观看| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 免费观看人在逋| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区 | cao死你这个sao货| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 国产在线观看jvid| 免费不卡黄色视频| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 老司机福利观看| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 夫妻午夜视频| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 捣出白浆h1v1| 美女福利国产在线| 日韩欧美免费精品| 曰老女人黄片| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 老司机影院毛片| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 香蕉丝袜av| 超碰成人久久| 久久精品成人免费网站| 黄色 视频免费看| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 亚洲欧美激情在线| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 国产麻豆69| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区 | 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 丁香六月天网| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 9191精品国产免费久久| 亚洲av美国av| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 欧美在线黄色| 性少妇av在线| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 不卡av一区二区三区| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 欧美日韩av久久| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕 | 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 亚洲伊人色综图| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 9热在线视频观看99| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 久久热在线av| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 久久人妻av系列| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 在线播放国产精品三级| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| www.精华液| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 777米奇影视久久| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 麻豆av在线久日| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 激情在线观看视频在线高清 | 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月 | 精品国产国语对白av| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 久久青草综合色| av有码第一页| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 午夜福利欧美成人| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 自线自在国产av| 操美女的视频在线观看| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| av福利片在线| 嫩草影视91久久| 免费不卡黄色视频| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| aaaaa片日本免费| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 国产高清激情床上av| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| videos熟女内射| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区 | 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影 | 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 国产在线观看jvid| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 精品第一国产精品| 亚洲,欧美精品.| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| av国产精品久久久久影院| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 亚洲 国产 在线| 最黄视频免费看| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | a级毛片在线看网站| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 久久香蕉激情| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 国产单亲对白刺激| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 曰老女人黄片| 三级毛片av免费| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 精品少妇内射三级| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说 | 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 蜜桃国产av成人99| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 十八禁网站免费在线| www日本在线高清视频| 男人操女人黄网站| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 69av精品久久久久久 | 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看 | 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| av天堂在线播放| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 91av网站免费观看| 欧美日韩黄片免| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 国产精品国产av在线观看| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 久久九九热精品免费| 美女午夜性视频免费| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 午夜久久久在线观看| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区 | 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 在线看a的网站| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 两个人看的免费小视频| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 国产高清videossex| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 考比视频在线观看| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 99香蕉大伊视频| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 777米奇影视久久| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 国产成人精品在线电影| 欧美日韩黄片免| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 成人影院久久| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| www.自偷自拍.com|