• <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.

    tube8黄色片| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| av免费在线观看网站| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 999久久久国产精品视频| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 中文欧美无线码| 蜜桃在线观看..| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| av不卡在线播放| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 美女午夜性视频免费| 水蜜桃什么品种好| a在线观看视频网站| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 成人影院久久| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 色94色欧美一区二区| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 色播在线永久视频| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 精品人妻在线不人妻| 久久久久久人人人人人| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看 | 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 性少妇av在线| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| www.自偷自拍.com| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 精品久久久精品久久久| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 多毛熟女@视频| bbb黄色大片| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲 | 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 1024视频免费在线观看| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 另类精品久久| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 欧美大码av| 亚洲人成电影观看| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 一个人免费看片子| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 国产精品1区2区在线观看. | 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 午夜免费鲁丝| av一本久久久久| 天堂8中文在线网| 国产1区2区3区精品| 精品少妇内射三级| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 男女国产视频网站| 中国国产av一级| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 久久九九热精品免费| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 成人免费观看视频高清| 免费观看人在逋| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www | 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 精品福利观看| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 免费在线观看日本一区| 人人澡人人妻人| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 一级黄色大片毛片| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 人妻一区二区av| 亚洲九九香蕉| tocl精华| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 99国产精品99久久久久| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影 | 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 国产成人影院久久av| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 一本久久精品| 成年av动漫网址| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 永久免费av网站大全| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 国产成人欧美| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 国产又爽黄色视频| 亚洲av美国av| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 91老司机精品| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 999精品在线视频| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 捣出白浆h1v1| 男女免费视频国产| av福利片在线| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 国产成人av教育| av天堂久久9| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 欧美大码av| 中文字幕制服av| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 日日夜夜操网爽| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 久久精品成人免费网站| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 一个人免费看片子| 制服诱惑二区| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 1024香蕉在线观看| 成人国产av品久久久| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 成人手机av| 精品国产国语对白av| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 大香蕉久久成人网| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 久热这里只有精品99| 久久性视频一级片| av不卡在线播放| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 在线av久久热| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 欧美大码av| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 免费少妇av软件| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 热re99久久国产66热| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 男女边摸边吃奶| av在线播放精品| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 男人操女人黄网站| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看 | 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 一级片免费观看大全| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 精品亚洲成国产av| 一区在线观看完整版| 精品国产国语对白av| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 在线 av 中文字幕| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 欧美日韩黄片免| 久热这里只有精品99| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频 | 大片电影免费在线观看免费| www日本在线高清视频| www.自偷自拍.com| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 99久久国产精品久久久| 咕卡用的链子| 一个人免费看片子| 久久中文字幕一级| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频 | 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 日韩视频在线欧美| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| av福利片在线| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 高清欧美精品videossex| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 精品久久久精品久久久| 中文字幕制服av| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 午夜免费鲁丝| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 国产成人精品无人区| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 一区福利在线观看| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 国产片内射在线| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 黄片大片在线免费观看| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 另类精品久久| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 免费在线观看日本一区| 国产在线观看jvid| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 日本欧美视频一区| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 国产精品免费视频内射| 黄色视频不卡| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 国产成人欧美| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频 | 亚洲久久久国产精品| av福利片在线| 99国产精品99久久久久| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 国产精品成人在线| 亚洲国产欧美网| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 国产男女内射视频| 999精品在线视频| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 9色porny在线观看| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区 | 99国产精品99久久久久| av在线app专区| 国产av精品麻豆| 免费av中文字幕在线| 欧美成人午夜精品| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久 | 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 亚洲全国av大片| 1024香蕉在线观看| 午夜激情av网站| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 成年动漫av网址| 免费看十八禁软件| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| tube8黄色片| 又大又爽又粗| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 久久影院123| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸 | 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 丝袜喷水一区| 国产av又大| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看 | 一级毛片电影观看| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 大码成人一级视频| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 五月开心婷婷网| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 99久久综合免费| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 欧美大码av| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 看免费av毛片| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 国产一区二区在线观看av| av电影中文网址| 午夜福利,免费看| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 一本久久精品| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 国产精品1区2区在线观看. | 午夜免费鲁丝| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 国产片内射在线| 中文字幕制服av| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 极品人妻少妇av视频| 一区二区三区激情视频| 亚洲中文av在线| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面 | 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 国产在视频线精品| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 久久久精品94久久精品| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 久久久久久久精品精品| 日本五十路高清| 又大又爽又粗| 超碰成人久久| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 精品福利永久在线观看| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 看免费av毛片| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 99久久综合免费| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 老司机靠b影院| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 欧美日韩黄片免| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 宅男免费午夜| 超色免费av| 色视频在线一区二区三区| av线在线观看网站| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 夫妻午夜视频| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 午夜福利,免费看| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 亚洲av美国av| www.精华液| 搡老岳熟女国产| av片东京热男人的天堂| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 欧美日韩av久久| 日本a在线网址| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 亚洲综合色网址| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 成人免费观看视频高清| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 一级黄色大片毛片| 女警被强在线播放| 美女午夜性视频免费| 国产片内射在线| 在线天堂中文资源库| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www | 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 91国产中文字幕| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 黄片小视频在线播放| 热re99久久国产66热| 国产成人精品无人区| 性色av一级| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 中国国产av一级| 91成年电影在线观看| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 麻豆av在线久日| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 精品福利永久在线观看| 午夜视频精品福利| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 亚洲av美国av| 国产在视频线精品| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| av天堂在线播放| 久久久精品94久久精品| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久 | 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 成人手机av| av在线app专区| 国产片内射在线| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 老熟女久久久| 多毛熟女@视频| 国产三级黄色录像| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 久久性视频一级片| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看 | 少妇 在线观看| 国产成人av教育| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 交换朋友夫妻互换小说| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| www.精华液| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 在线 av 中文字幕| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 脱女人内裤的视频| 永久免费av网站大全| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 午夜日韩欧美国产| 国产精品 国内视频| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 夫妻午夜视频| 老司机影院毛片| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三 | 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久 | 一级黄色大片毛片| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 精品久久久精品久久久| 中文欧美无线码| 天天影视国产精品| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| av超薄肉色丝袜交足视频| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 高清在线国产一区| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 久久久欧美国产精品| 久久久久久久精品精品| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 91字幕亚洲| 国产激情久久老熟女| av有码第一页| 五月天丁香电影| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 一本久久精品| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 在线观看人妻少妇| 脱女人内裤的视频| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 两个人看的免费小视频| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 亚洲精品在线美女| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 亚洲中文av在线| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 9热在线视频观看99| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 精品一区在线观看国产| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 午夜激情av网站|