• <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 ?

    Robotic vs. traditional stapler use in robotic portal anatomic lung resection

    2020-07-30 08:27:26JosephPhillipsKaylaFayRianHassonTimothyMillingtonDavidFinley
    Mini-invasive Surgery 2020年2期

    Joseph D.Phillips, Kayla A.Fay, Rian M.Hasson, Timothy M.Millington, David J.Finley

    Section of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.

    Abstract

    Keywords: Robotic stapler, robotic lung resection, lung cancer, EndoWrist?

    INTRODUCTION

    Robotic resection for lung cancer is becoming increasingly accepted by the thoracic surgery community.Several recent publications have demonstrated the feasibility, safety, and equivalent oncologic outcomes for robotic anatomic resections compared to traditional Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (VATS) and improved postoperative outcomes compared to traditional thoracotomy[1-6].Advantages of robotic resection over traditional VATS include improved visualization with three-dimensional viewing, articulated instruments, and increased flexibility in areas of limited operating space.Previous drawbacks to robotics have required an experienced bedside assistant for division of the hilar structures with a traditional VATS stapler, or for the operating surgeon to leave the console to return to the bedside to perform this critical portion of the operation.In 2014, the da Vinci Xi System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA) was introduced, with instrument updates in early 2016 which provided a 30-mm curved-tip stapler that was capable of providing the console surgeon the ability to control and fire staplers for division of vascular, bronchial, and parenchymal structures[7,8].This decreased some of the potential limitations for surgeons to perform minimally invasive anatomic lung resections by allowing a critical step to be placed back in the hands of the operating surgeon at the console[9].

    Currently, there is a paucity of data regarding the perioperative outcomes of robotic anatomic lung resection comparing robotic staplers to traditional VATS stapling devices.We sought to investigate our institutional experience with patients undergoing robotic anatomic lung resection stratified by the type of stapler used over a contemporary period.

    METHODS

    Patients

    A retrospective analysis of an institutional review board approved prospective Thoracic Surgery database was performed.All consecutive patients who underwent lung resection between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2018 were included.Patients were excluded if they underwent a non-anatomic resection (wedge), underwent planned or were converted to a thoracotomy, or had a VATS that did not include the use of the da Vinci robotic system [Figure 1].The primary aim of this study was to investigate intraoperative and postoperative outcomes with the da Vinci EndoWrist? robotic stapler compared to the Covidien Endo GIATMstapler (Medtronic, Fridley MN) in robotic anatomic lung resections.This study was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (#30040).

    Data collection

    Demographic data (age, sex, and race), pulmonary co-morbidities, operative data (operative time and stapler use), pathologic data (stage and lymph nodes collected), postoperative length of stay (LOS), and 30-day complications were obtained.Operative time, in minutes, was calculated from surgery start and stop times.Postoperative complications were monitored for 30 days from the index procedure date and graded I-IV as classified by Clavien-Dindo[10,11].The primary outcome of interest was presence of a postoperative prolonged air leak (PAL), which was defined as an air leak lasting more than five days, as defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons[12].

    Surgical technique

    Figure 1.Study inclusion and exclusion.VATS: video-assisted thoracic surgery

    Anatomic lung resections were performed by two surgeons as previously described[13].Briefly, all resections utilized the da Vinci Xi system with a four-arm technique and an additional 15-mm assistant port.The camera and robotic ports are placed in the 6th-8th intercostal spaces, depending on the tumor site.The assistant port is placed as low as possible without traversing the diaphragm.When a traditional VATS stapler is used, 8-mm robotic trocars are placed and the stapler is introduced via the 15-mm assistant port.When the robotic stapler is used, one or two 12-mm trocars are placed, as described previously[7].There are limited requirements for the assistant to change instruments when the robotic stapler is used, but he/she maintains the ability to insert ancillary instruments and remove specimens without undocking a robotic arm.In addition, retraction and tension are controlled by the surgeon and exposure of the operative field is more stable[14,15].Typically, a bipolar grasper is used in the surgeon's left hand and a monopolar spatula in the right.Retraction is facilitated via a tip-up fenestrated grasper in the 3rd arm.The spatula provides excellent blunt dissection capability, has less arc than the hook, and is less sharp than the Maryland bipolar dissector.A mediastinal lymph node dissection is performed initially, as it provides exposure for portions of the bronchial and lobar lymph node dissections.The pulmonary artery in the fissure is then dissected as appropriate, limiting the dissection of lung parenchyma as much as possible.The hilar structures and lymph nodes are then circumferentially dissected.The vascular structures are often divided first, followed by the bronchus.Any remaining lung parenchyma is divided at convenient points to facilitate exposure.

    Stapler

    Stapler choice was at the discretion of the attending surgeon.Intuitive released the 30-mm curved EndoWrist? robotic stapler in early 2016 and the first use of this stapler at our institution occurred in September 2016.Robotic stapler use was exclusively performed by one surgeon (JDP).Typically, division of structures by staple load were: vascular (white), bronchus (green), and parenchyma (blue or green based on thickness).Hilar structures are typically divided with the 30-mm curved stapler and parenchyma with the 45-mm stapler.The Covidien Endo GIATM12-mm stapler with Tri-StapleTM2.0 Intelligent Reload technology was used during the study period.Typically, division of structures by staple load were: vascular (tan), bronchus (purple), and parenchyma (tan, purple, or black based on thickness).

    Analysis

    Univariate analysis was performed to assess for differences in perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics between the cases that utilized the EndroWrist? robotic stapler and those that utilized the Endo GIATMstapler.Two-tailed student'st-tests were used for continuous variables and chisquare tests were used for categorical variables.AP-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

    RESULTS

    In total, 634 lung resections occurred during the study period.Of those, 236 met inclusion criteria, and 49 cases (20.8%) utilized the robotic stapler fully.Three cases used the robotic stapler for division of the hilar structures but the Covidien stapler for division of the lung parenchyma.These three cases were classified in the Covidien stapler group.Of note, only 12 planned robotic cases were converted to open and were excluded, corresponding to a conversion rate of 4.8%.Of these 12 conversions: three were following induction therapy, two required a pulmonary artery plasty, and seven were related to a combination of adhesions or tumor location that limited safe dissection around critical structures.Table 1 provides a comparison of the perioperative patient characteristics between the robotic and traditional stapler groups.There was no difference in demographics between the two groups, with a mean age of 67 in both and most patients were Caucasian.The robotic stapler group had more patients with a history of asthma, (14.2%vs.5.9%,P= 0.05), but otherwise did not differ in the presence of other co-morbidities.In addition, there were no differences in preoperative pulmonary function testing or rate of induction therapy.

    Table 1.Characteristics of study population

    Intraoperative characteristics between the two groups are compared in Table 2.Cases that utilized the robotic stapler had a significantly longer average operative time (224 minvs.176 min,P< 0.001).Given that these cases were performed by a surgeon in the first few years of practice, this likely reflects a learning curve rather than inherent delay with use of the robotic stapler, as evidenced by a significant decrease in average operative time from 2016-2017 (n= 21) to 2018 (n= 28) (247 minvs.207 min, respectively;P= 0.01).There was no difference in the average number of staple loads used per case between the two groups.While the number of staple loads may seem high, anatomic resection is often preceded by a diagnostic wedge, which obviously increases the total number of staple loads used.Pathologic staging was similar between the two groups, although there were significantly more stage IIB cases in the robotic stapler group.There were no differences in lymph node stations or total lymph nodes collected between groups.

    Postoperative outcomes are compared in Table 3.There was no difference in average LOS between the two groups (median three days for both).Median chest tube duration was two days for both groups, and ~20% of patients in each group were discharged with a chest tube.The overall postoperative PAL rate was 25.8% for the entire cohort.Within the robotic stapler group, the PAL rate was 20.4%, compared to 27.3% in the Covidien stapler group (P= 0.33).In the robotic stapler group, one patient with a PAL underwent a bedside doxycycline pleurodesis.In the Covidien stapler group, 10 patients underwent a procedure for management (six had bedside doxycycline pleurodesis, three had endobronchial valves, and one had both bedside pleurodesis and endobronchial valves).There was no difference in grade ≥ 3 complications, readmissions, or 30-day mortality.

    Table 2.Operative characteristics of study population

    Table 3.Postoperative characteristics of study population

    1P-values from student's t-test or chi-square test where appropriate.2Grade 3/4 complication as classified by Clavien-Dindo.3Within 30-days of index procedure.4Unexpected return to OR within 30-days of index procedure.5Defined as an air leak that lasted beyond postoperative day 5.6Requiring drainage.7Requiring bronchoscopy.8Requiring chest tube reinsertion.9Requiring treatment.10Includes anemia, bowel obstruction, dehydration, syncope, hyponatremia, gastrointestinal bleed, fluid overload, and thrombus.x: statistics unable to be performed

    DISCUSSION

    As new technology becomes available, it is important that surgeons critically evaluate its use.The 30-mm curve tip EndoWrist? stapler was introduced in March 2016.However, only a few reports to date in the literature describe its use in pulmonary resections[7,8,16,17].To our knowledge, the current study is the first to directly compare the robotic stapler and a traditional VATS stapler related to perioperative outcomes in robotic anatomic lung resections.We found no clinically significant differences in preoperative characteristics between the two stapler groups at our institution.There were also no clinically significant differences noted in the number of staple loads used, pathologic stage, or lymph nodes harvested.We did identify a significant increase in operative time in the group that utilized the robotic stapler.As the robotic stapler was exclusively used by a new attending surgeon, this likely represents a learning curve rather than an intrinsic delay related to stapler use, as evidenced by the significant reduction in operative time for these cases over the course of the study period.Moreover, there were no differences in LOS, chest tube duration, or postoperative complications between the two groups.Overall, our outcomes are in-line with recently published experiences[6,8,18,19].

    Ultimately, we did not find a difference in the rate of postoperative PAL or chest tube duration between the two groups.While a recent analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons DataBase reported an overall rate of PAL of 10.4%[20], rates following anatomic lung resection range from 6% to 30%[19].Several risk factors have been reported to increase the risk of PAL, including forced expiratory volume in 1 second < 70% of predicted, body mass index < 25 kg/m2, previous smoking, anatomic lung resection, pleural adhesions, male sex, and right upper lobe procedure[19,20].Many of our patients have several, if not most of these risk factors.In addition, our rural patient population has a significant proportion of patients who began smoking at an early age.Smoking in childhood and during the teenage years can slow lung development and increase the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adulthood[21].Early smoke exposure leads to airway inflammation and parenchymal lung injury with larger saccules, increased density of interstitial tissue, and reduced elastin and collagen[22].These factors may help to explain our rate of postoperative PAL in the setting of otherwise low rates of complications.However, our study is not powered or intended to predict an increase in PAL based on these factors.In addition, we are aggressive about discharging patients from the hospital with a chest tube in place.Given our rural catchment area, this may result in some delay in actual chest tube removal beyond Postoperative Day 5 when an air leak is not actually present.

    Variability in the techniques of robotic anatomic lung resection exist.A recently published survey of highvolume robotic thoracic surgeons demonstrated that most respondents utilized a four-arm approach and 94% used an additional non-robotic assistant port[23].In respondents, there was not a universal standard port placement, and stapling port strategies were nuanced by lobe and type of stapler used.As additional technologies are developed, it will be important to evaluate their efficacy and effectiveness, in terms of both clinical outcomes and healthcare costs.

    The successful performance of robotic lung resection requires a strong team in the operating room composed of surgeons, nurses, surgical techs, anesthesia providers, and a bedside assistant.The literature describes the learning curve of a robotic lobectomy as 18-32 cases for a surgeon and 20 for a bedside assistant[24-26].Specific to anatomic lung resection, division of the pulmonary vascular structures is a potentially hazardous portion of the operation that requires significant skill to perform safely.Prior to the development of the robotic stapler, this required a competent bedside assistant or the console surgeon to return to the bedside.At our institution, we have dedicated physician assistants or trained residents who can safely complete these tasks.However, this may not be the case for every thoracic surgeon.Others have fully described the range of motion capabilities of the EndoWrist? stapler, as well as the safety components that ensure adequate closing and prevent the firing of an incorrectly loaded or spent reload[8].Drawbacks of using the robotic stapler are the need for a 12-mm port, the long length of the stapler load that can impede maneuverability in the chest, and the rotational limitation that can occur when the wrist is fully flexed.This stapler does provide the console surgeon with the ability to control the stapler during division of critical structures and may improve one's ability to perform complex minimally invasive techniques with reduced conversions[9,17].These benefits may be more apparent at sites where a fully thoracic-trained bedside assistant is not available.

    The findings of our study should be viewed in the context of several limitations.This is a retrospective, single institution cohort study and subject to potential selection bias, and our results may not be generalizable to other patient populations.In addition, our data show that the robotic stapler group operating time was significantly longer.However, as mentioned above, this is likely related to one surgeon's learning curve and not an inherently longer time for use of the stapler.Nevertheless, our outcomes are inline or better than those reported by multiple authors in the literature, and, to our knowledge, this is the first study to directly compare the EndoWrist? robotic stapler to a traditional Endo GIATMstapler.Clinical outcomes appear to be equivalent in our patient population and further study is needed to assess if there is a difference in cost-effectiveness between these devices.

    In conclusion, robotic anatomic lung resection has been shown to be safe and feasible with equivalent long-term oncologic outcomes when compared to VATS and thoracotomy.In this study, we compared perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing robotic anatomic lung resection to assess whether there are any differences based on the type of stapler utilized.We found equivalent rates of complications, PAL, and chest tube duration between the two groups.Based on our data, we recommend that surgeons use the stapling device with which they are most confident.

    DECLARATIONS

    Authors' contributions

    Made substantial contributions to conception and design of the study and performed data analysis and interpretation: Phillips JD, Fay KA, Finley DJ

    Made substantial contributions to data interpretation and drafting and critical revisions of the manuscript: Phillips JD, Fay KA, Hasson RM, Millington TM, Finley DJ

    Availability of data and materials

    The data source is a prospectively collected institutional database containing personal health information (PHI).Per Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (DHMC) policy, any request for data would require an approved Data Use Agreement (DUA) between DHMC and the requesting individual and/or institution.

    Financial support and sponsorship

    None.

    Conflicts of interest

    Phillips JD has previously received consulting fees from Intuitive Surgical, Inc.but has no ongoing relationship.All other authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest related to this work.

    Ethical approval and consent to participate

    The study was reviewed by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects of Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and approved.

    Consent for publication

    Not applicable.

    Copyright

    ? The Author(s) 2020.

    校园春色视频在线观看| 久久狼人影院| 悠悠久久av| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 两性夫妻黄色片| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 不卡av一区二区三区| 此物有八面人人有两片| 免费高清视频大片| 国产真实乱freesex| 久久热在线av| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 久久精品91蜜桃| 97碰自拍视频| 亚洲国产看品久久| 免费高清视频大片| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 国产色视频综合| 欧美日韩乱码在线| av在线天堂中文字幕| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 露出奶头的视频| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片 | 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 男女那种视频在线观看| 校园春色视频在线观看| 人人澡人人妻人| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 国产三级在线视频| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 国产区一区二久久| 亚洲最大成人中文| 一区福利在线观看| 午夜免费激情av| svipshipincom国产片| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 久久香蕉国产精品| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 91国产中文字幕| 91字幕亚洲| 国产精品免费视频内射| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 精品国产亚洲在线| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 两性夫妻黄色片| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 国产精品,欧美在线| 1024视频免费在线观看| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| av中文乱码字幕在线| av有码第一页| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 少妇 在线观看| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 午夜福利高清视频| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 精品高清国产在线一区| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 亚洲全国av大片| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆 | 午夜免费观看网址| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 91老司机精品| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 色综合站精品国产| 成人国语在线视频| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 午夜福利在线在线| 国产精品 国内视频| 精品日产1卡2卡| 亚洲av成人一区二区三| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 美女大奶头视频| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久 | 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片 | 久久亚洲精品不卡| 1024手机看黄色片| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 男女视频在线观看网站免费 | 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 在线免费观看的www视频| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播 | 国产日本99.免费观看| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 亚洲色图av天堂| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 国产亚洲欧美98| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 久久中文字幕一级| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 怎么达到女性高潮| 亚洲 欧美 日韩 在线 免费| 草草在线视频免费看| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 国产精品野战在线观看| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 黄色成人免费大全| 91在线观看av| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 一夜夜www| 热99re8久久精品国产| 久久热在线av| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 成人三级黄色视频| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 免费看日本二区| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 麻豆av在线久日| 成年免费大片在线观看| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 成人国产综合亚洲| 色在线成人网| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 一本久久中文字幕| 午夜久久久在线观看| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 最好的美女福利视频网| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 高清在线国产一区| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 午夜a级毛片| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 无限看片的www在线观看| 宅男免费午夜| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 久久伊人香网站| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 国产精华一区二区三区| 日本在线视频免费播放| 极品教师在线免费播放| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| av欧美777| 午夜免费激情av| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 成在线人永久免费视频| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 天堂动漫精品| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 国产精品 国内视频| 久久热在线av| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 久久中文字幕一级| 国产区一区二久久| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 国产单亲对白刺激| 此物有八面人人有两片| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频 | 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| a级毛片a级免费在线| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 悠悠久久av| 久久亚洲真实| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 波多野结衣高清作品| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 国产野战对白在线观看| 操出白浆在线播放| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 午夜a级毛片| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 亚洲av美国av| 国产高清videossex| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 亚洲色图av天堂| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| a在线观看视频网站| 91大片在线观看| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影 | 黄色 视频免费看| 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 一本精品99久久精品77| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| aaaaa片日本免费| 91在线观看av| 丁香欧美五月| 国产色视频综合| 在线国产一区二区在线| 午夜影院日韩av| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频| 日本三级黄在线观看| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 亚洲九九香蕉| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看 | 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 窝窝影院91人妻| 91字幕亚洲| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 曰老女人黄片| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 日本熟妇午夜| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区| 丰满的人妻完整版| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免费看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 99国产精品99久久久久| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 九九在线视频观看精品| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| av在线亚洲专区| 搡老岳熟女国产| 十八禁网站免费在线| 久久草成人影院| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 色吧在线观看| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 日本与韩国留学比较| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 免费观看在线日韩| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 午夜精品在线福利| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 久久九九热精品免费| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 看免费成人av毛片| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 国产真实乱freesex| 两个人的视频大全免费| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区 | 三级毛片av免费| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 亚洲成人久久性| 一本一本综合久久| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 日本 av在线| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 日日啪夜夜撸| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 精品日产1卡2卡| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 男女做爰动态图高潮gif福利片| 直男gayav资源| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 日本三级黄在线观看| 丰满的人妻完整版| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 久久久久国产网址| 精品久久久久久久末码| 九九在线视频观看精品| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 美女高潮的动态| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 精品午夜福利在线看| 一本精品99久久精品77| 天堂√8在线中文| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 综合色av麻豆| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱 | 精品久久久久久成人av| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 欧美+日韩+精品| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 黄色日韩在线| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| ponron亚洲| 99热6这里只有精品| 日本五十路高清| 免费看日本二区| 日本 av在线| 老女人水多毛片| 深夜精品福利| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 综合色丁香网| h日本视频在线播放| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 日本色播在线视频| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国产成人福利小说| 国产午夜精品论理片| 亚洲av熟女| h日本视频在线播放| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 91精品国产九色| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 亚洲五月天丁香| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 国产高清激情床上av| www.色视频.com| 禁无遮挡网站| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 免费av毛片视频| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 黄色日韩在线| 嫩草影院新地址| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验 | 一本久久中文字幕| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 老司机福利观看| 香蕉av资源在线| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 亚洲不卡免费看| 免费高清视频大片| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 1000部很黄的大片| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清| 久久精品影院6| 99热精品在线国产| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 99热精品在线国产| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 校园春色视频在线观看| 午夜a级毛片| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 免费看av在线观看网站| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 深夜a级毛片| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 嫩草影院精品99| 亚洲色图av天堂| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 亚洲四区av| 日本五十路高清| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 三级经典国产精品| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 国产一区二区三区av在线 | 国产视频一区二区在线看| 99热6这里只有精品| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 九九在线视频观看精品| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 日韩欧美三级三区| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 美女大奶头视频| 亚洲在线观看片| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 美女免费视频网站| 直男gayav资源| 深夜精品福利| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 免费大片18禁| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 毛片女人毛片| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 日日啪夜夜撸| 一级av片app| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久 | 国产一区二区激情短视频| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 亚洲最大成人av| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 欧美zozozo另类| 九九在线视频观看精品| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 美女大奶头视频| 国产精品永久免费网站| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 亚洲av熟女| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| a级毛片a级免费在线| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 一级av片app| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 国产黄片美女视频| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 亚洲av美国av| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 美女黄网站色视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱 | 久久久久久久久中文| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 日韩中字成人| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | av专区在线播放| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 高清毛片免费看| 天堂√8在线中文| 久久久久久久久久成人| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 赤兔流量卡办理| 欧美激情在线99| 身体一侧抽搐| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 天堂影院成人在线观看| av在线播放精品| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 嫩草影院入口| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通|