• <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
    成在线人永久免费视频| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 大香蕉久久网| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 91麻豆av在线| 日本a在线网址| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 一个人免费看片子| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 一区在线观看完整版| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 免费少妇av软件| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 美女福利国产在线| 一区二区av电影网| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| av在线播放精品| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 最黄视频免费看| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 两个人看的免费小视频| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 一级片免费观看大全| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 中文字幕色久视频| 国产成人影院久久av| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| h视频一区二区三区| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 男女免费视频国产| 看免费成人av毛片| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 免费少妇av软件| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 婷婷成人精品国产| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美 | 女人久久www免费人成看片| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 一级黄片播放器| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 99国产精品99久久久久| 国产高清videossex| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 久久性视频一级片| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 精品视频人人做人人爽| www.自偷自拍.com| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 成人三级做爰电影| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 精品亚洲成国产av| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 少妇 在线观看| www日本在线高清视频| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 久久热在线av| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 日本午夜av视频| 大香蕉久久成人网| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 久久99一区二区三区| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 亚洲精品一二三| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 黄频高清免费视频| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 国产一级毛片在线| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 免费在线观看影片大全网站 | 欧美日韩黄片免| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 欧美精品av麻豆av| av网站在线播放免费| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 国产成人一区二区在线| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 亚洲国产av新网站| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 97在线人人人人妻| 飞空精品影院首页| 久久人人爽人人片av| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 夫妻午夜视频| 七月丁香在线播放| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 久久性视频一级片| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看 | 脱女人内裤的视频| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 看免费av毛片| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 9色porny在线观看| 国产片内射在线| 高清av免费在线| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| av在线播放精品| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 夫妻午夜视频| 国产视频首页在线观看| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 免费在线观看日本一区| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索 | 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 黄片播放在线免费| av一本久久久久| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 国产男女内射视频| 多毛熟女@视频| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 亚洲av美国av| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 午夜福利,免费看| 深夜精品福利| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 国产欧美亚洲国产| www.999成人在线观看| kizo精华| 人妻一区二区av| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 乱人伦中国视频| av在线老鸭窝| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 精品人妻1区二区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| av不卡在线播放| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 色播在线永久视频| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 咕卡用的链子| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 自线自在国产av| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 国产一级毛片在线| 亚洲精品第二区| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 一级黄色大片毛片| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 一本综合久久免费| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 日本wwww免费看| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 高清欧美精品videossex| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 午夜免费观看性视频| www.av在线官网国产| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密 | 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 大香蕉久久成人网| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| xxx大片免费视频| 搡老乐熟女国产| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 性色av一级| 天天影视国产精品| 黄片小视频在线播放| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸 | 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 日韩视频在线欧美| 午夜福利,免费看| 国产av精品麻豆| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 天堂8中文在线网| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 久久精品成人免费网站| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 脱女人内裤的视频| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 午夜两性在线视频| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 天天添夜夜摸| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 久久99一区二区三区| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 99热网站在线观看| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 一本综合久久免费| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 在现免费观看毛片| 999久久久国产精品视频| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 91麻豆av在线| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 99热全是精品| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 999久久久国产精品视频| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 国产精品免费大片| 日本午夜av视频| av福利片在线| 免费av中文字幕在线| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 大香蕉久久网| 久久99精品国语久久久| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 国产成人av教育| 国产高清videossex| 曰老女人黄片| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 国产在线视频一区二区| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 日韩av免费高清视频| 高清欧美精品videossex| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 搡老乐熟女国产| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 七月丁香在线播放| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 18禁观看日本| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 只有这里有精品99| 成人影院久久| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 韩国精品一区二区三区| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 久久精品亚洲av国产电影网| 国产男女内射视频| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸 | 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀 | 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 午夜影院在线不卡| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 亚洲图色成人| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产 | 9191精品国产免费久久| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 日本wwww免费看| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 丁香六月天网| 黄频高清免费视频| 久久久久视频综合| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 亚洲国产精品999| 久久这里只有精品19| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 9热在线视频观看99| 国产淫语在线视频| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 一级黄片播放器| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区 | 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 天堂8中文在线网| 一个人免费看片子| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 日本午夜av视频| 亚洲国产欧美网| 午夜影院在线不卡| 日本a在线网址| 高清av免费在线| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 深夜精品福利| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 老司机影院毛片| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 只有这里有精品99| 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 99久久人妻综合| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 成人三级做爰电影| 99热全是精品| 捣出白浆h1v1| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 久久精品国产综合久久久| h视频一区二区三区| 男女边摸边吃奶| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 国产在线观看jvid| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 深夜精品福利| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 久热这里只有精品99| 中文欧美无线码| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 制服人妻中文乱码| 妹子高潮喷水视频| videosex国产| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 少妇人妻 视频| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 亚洲第一青青草原| 女警被强在线播放| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲国产精品999| 一区二区av电影网| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 黄片小视频在线播放| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | av网站在线播放免费| 性色av一级| 色网站视频免费| 伦理电影免费视频| av线在线观看网站| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 免费在线观看日本一区| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 一个人免费看片子| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 国产淫语在线视频| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看 | 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 免费看十八禁软件| 热re99久久国产66热| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 国产片内射在线| 美女午夜性视频免费| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 精品高清国产在线一区| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 少妇人妻 视频| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 亚洲成色77777| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 制服诱惑二区| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看 | 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 免费不卡黄色视频| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码 | 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 久久九九热精品免费| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 大香蕉久久网| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 午夜av观看不卡| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 亚洲成人手机| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美 | 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 国产精品 国内视频| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 免费观看人在逋| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 久久免费观看电影| 一本综合久久免费| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 一级毛片电影观看| 国产成人系列免费观看| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看 | 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 久热这里只有精品99| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看 | 色94色欧美一区二区| 久久影院123| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 久久久久视频综合| 亚洲图色成人| 制服诱惑二区| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 一本大道久久a久久精品| videosex国产| av在线播放精品| 亚洲av美国av| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 91成人精品电影| 亚洲国产av新网站| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 国产成人影院久久av| 精品福利观看| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频 | 首页视频小说图片口味搜索 | 一区二区三区精品91| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 国产成人欧美| 青草久久国产| 一级黄片播放器| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 热re99久久国产66热| 成人免费观看视频高清| 人人澡人人妻人| 宅男免费午夜| 中国国产av一级| 亚洲精品一二三| 精品一区在线观看国产| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| tube8黄色片| 99热网站在线观看| 亚洲伊人色综图| 日本wwww免费看| 老熟女久久久| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 亚洲伊人色综图| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 操出白浆在线播放| 91字幕亚洲|