• <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 ?

    Complications of modern pancreaticoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

    2022-12-19 08:10:12StmtiosKokkinkisEvngelosKritsotkisNeofytosMliotisIonnisKrgeorgiouEmmnuelChrysosKonstntinosLsithiotkis

    Stmtios Kokkinkis , Evngelos I Kritsotkis , Neofytos Mliotis , Ionnis Krgeorgiou ,Emmnuel Chrysos , Konstntinos Lsithiotkis ,?

    a Department of General Surgery, University General Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, Crete 71110, Greece

    b Laboratory of Biostatistics, Division of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Crete 71110, Greece

    Keywords:Pancreaticoduodenectomy Postoperative complications Meta-analysis Postoperative pancreatic fistula

    A B S T R A C T

    Introduction

    Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is considered one of the most complex procedures in general surgery and it is associated with considerable morbidity. In the last decades, PDs have been mostly performed in high-volume centers and this centralization has led to important reduction in postoperative mortality [1–3] . Moreover,the perioperative management of PD patients has undergone significant advances, such as the widespread availability of interventional radiology that leads to less invasive management of major complications and fewer reoperations [ 4 , 5 ] and the use of prehabilitation programs that show promising results regarding postoperative outcomes [6] . Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have also established their usefulness in PD patients, with reported reduction in overall morbidity and the length of stay [7] .Moreover, internationally accepted criteria are now widely used to better define complications following PD [ 8 , 9 ], allowing for precise recording and grading.

    Due to these new parameters, the management and the outcomes are substantially different compared to those in the previous decades. This systematic review aimed to assess the preand intraoperative data, and postoperative complications of modern PDs in pancreatic centers worldwide in the last decade, to provide useful benchmarks for centers dealing with lower PD volumes and facilitate patient counseling preoperatively.

    Methods

    This study is compliant with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement [10] . A search in PubMed from January 2010 to April 2020 was performed.The bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews and original reports were screened in search of additional studies.

    Including criteria for studies

    Typesofstudies

    Both randomized control trials and non-randomized clinical studies were included. Non-randomized studies, either comparative or non-comparative, were considered eligible for this review if the complications were recorded prospectively based on predetermined criteria. Studies based on registry data were also eligible.For inclusion, a minimum of 100 PDs, a follow-up for complications of at least 30 days and a study period between January 2010 and April 2020 were required. Only studies written in English were considered. We excluded case reports, case series, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, non-clinical studies and publications in nonpeer reviewed journals.

    Typesofparticipants

    Adult patients undergoing PD either for suspected or confirmed neoplastic lesions were included. Patients undergoing PD for trauma or a known non-neoplastic disease (such as chronic pancreatitis) were excluded. PDs performed on animals were excluded.

    Typesofinterventions

    Open and minimally-invasive PDs were included, regardless of the reconstruction method used. Classic Whipple procedures and pylorus-preserving PDs were included. Only PDs with curative intent were included, when no additional operations were performed, except for vascular resections. Studies in which the details of the operative technique were unclear or not reported were excluded.

    Typesofoutcomemeasures

    Outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, both surgical and medical, postoperative mortality and length of hospital stay after PD.

    Data collection and analysis

    Three authors (Kokkinakis S, Karageorgiou I and Maliotis N) independently assessed all identified articles based on our eligibility criteria. Any discrepancies involving relevant articles were discussed between authors until agreement was reached. If no agreement was reached between authors, Lasithiotakis K served as arbitrator. Articles were included if all patients or at least a subgroup of patients involved in the study fulfilled our eligibility criteria. According to the PRISMA criteria, identified articles were first screened based on their titles. The remaining articles were screened based on their abstract, which had to be compliant to our eligibility criteria. Thirdly, full-texts of all articles that successfully passed the second level of screening were reviewed in detail,to identify the studies to be included in the final analysis.

    Data extraction and management

    Data were extracted using a predetermined standardized form by 3 authors (Kokkinakis S, Karageorgiou I and Maliotis N) independently. Any disagreements regarding the extracted items were discussed between authors until a consensus was reached, while Lasithiotakis K served as arbitrator. If relevant data were missing or unclear for extraction, the study authors were contacted for clarification. Data extracted included the following information.

    (1) Publication data: author, year of publication, country of origin, study period, number of patients, study design, aim of the study.

    (2) Pre- and intraoperative data: summary statistics for age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA)score, preoperative biliary drainage, operative time, blood loss,intraoperative transfusion, concomitant vascular resection, percentage of patients with soft pancreas and small pancreatic duct (diameter < 3 mm).(3) Surgical complications: mortality (in-hospital, 30- and 90-day),rate of overall complications, serious complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF, overall and clinically-relevant), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), biliary leak, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), intra-abdominal abscess formation, surgical site infection (SSI), postoperative pancreatitis, reoperation, readmission (30-day and 60/90-day) and length of postoperative hospital stay.

    (4) Medical complications: cardiac, respiratory, neurologic complications, venous thromboembolism (VTE), urinary tract infection(UTI), acute renal failure (ARF) and sepsis.

    (5) The definitions used for each complication were also recorded.

    Assessment of risk of bias in included studies

    Risk of bias in randomized trials was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool RoB2 [11] . The methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) was used in order to evaluate the quality of observational studies [12] , with a maximum score of 16 for non-comparative and 24 for comparative studies. The signaling questions were asked independently by 2 authors (Kokkinakis S and Maliotis N), and any discrepancies were resolved by a third author (Lasithiotakis K).

    Meta-analysis methods

    Pooled estimates of single group proportions and means were obtained as weighted averages using the random-effects inversevariance model with DerSimonian and Laird estimate of the between-study variance. The Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation was utilized to stabilize the variances when pooling proportions [13] . Sample means and standard deviations were estimated from commonly reported quantiles in individual studies when required [14] . Higgin’sI2index was used to quantify the heterogeneity in reported proportions and means between the studies. The statistical significance of heterogeneity was tested using Cochran’s Q statistic. Subgroup analysis and univariate randomeffects meta-regression were used to examine if variation in reported complication rates may be explained by differences in study characteristics (country of origin, study design, data collection method, type and pathology of PD, and risk of bias rating) or characteristics of the patients (average age, operative time and blood loss, and proportions of ASA categories, biliary drainage, transfusion, soft pancreas, small pancreatic duct and vascular resection).Multivariate meta-regression was pursued to assess independent contributions from characteristics that were found to be statistically significant (P< 0.05) in univariate analysis, provided that at least 10 additional studies were available for every degree of freedom modelled [15] . All analyses were carried out in STATA (Version 17; Statcorp, College Station, TX, USA).

    Fig. 1. PRISMA flowchart depicting the inclusion process for the systematic review.

    Results

    Description of studies

    The literature search yielded 2499 studies. Following title and abstract screenings, 166 studies were eligible for full-text screening. Of those, 97 were excluded according to the criteria and 69 studies were deemed eligible for data extraction and analysis. The flowchart depicting our inclusion process is shown in Fig. 1 . Of the included studies, 20 were randomized controlled trials [16–35] and 49 were non-randomized [36–84] . Six studies were based on registry data [ 4 8 , 51 , 57 , 6 8 , 71 , 77 ].

    Risk of bias

    After the assessment of the risk of bias in the included studies, 6 randomized trials (30%) were deemed as low-risk studies,9 (45%) raised some concerns, and 5 (25%) were deemed to have high-risk bias based on the RoB2 tool. The mean MINORS for nonrandomized studies were 19.0 ± 1.2 for comparative studies and 12.0 ± 0.9 for non-comparative studies, indicating high-risk of bias in both cases.

    Meta-analysis

    Sixty-nine studies with 63 229 participants were analyzed. Preand intraoperative characteristics of the included patients are reported in Table 1 . The pooled mean for patient age was 63.7 years (95% CI: 62.3–65.2;I2= 98.8%), mean operative time was 366.9 min (95% CI: 348.3–385.6;I2= 99.4%) and mean blood loss was 424.6 mL (95% CI: 379.1–470.0;I2= 98.9%).

    Postoperative surgical and medical complications are shown in Table 2 . The pooled rate of all complications combined was 54.7%(95% CI: 46.4%–62.8%;I2= 99.4%), while the rate of serious complications was 25.5% (95% CI: 21.8%–29.4%;I2= 92.9%). The pooled risk of 30-day mortality from 22 studies was 1.7% (95% CI: 0.9%-2.9%;I2= 95.4%) ( Fig. 2 ). The risk of CR-POPF was 14.3% (95%CI: 12.4%–16.3%;I2= 92.0%; 57 studies) ( Fig. 3 ). The pooled mean length of hospital stay after PD was 14.8 days (95% CI: 13.6-16.1;I2= 99.3%; 48 studies) ( Fig. 4 ). The classification proposed by Clavien-Dindo [85] was most frequently used to define overall complications, with serious complications usually being defined as Clavien-Dindo grade > II, while International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) criteria [ 8 , 86 , 87 ] were mostly used to define POPF, DGE and PPH.

    Subgroup analyses did not detect significant variation in complication rates according to the different definitions for complications reported in the studies. Univariate random-effects metaregression showed that heterogeneity was partially explained by differences in characteristics of the studies and their patients,such as continent of origin of the study, study design (multicenter or single center), patient age and ASA score ( Table 3 ). The 30-day mortality was significantly higher in studies performed in North America [mean difference (MD) = 3.4%, 95% CI: 1.0%-5.9%;P= 0.005] and lower in Asian studies (MD = -3.5%, 95% CI: -5.8%to -1.2%;P= 0.003). 30-day mortality was also higher in studies that included minimally invasive PDs (MD = 3.7%, 95% CI: 1.2%-6.2%;P= 0.004) and those involving only malignant pathologies(MD = 3.6%, 95% CI 1.1%-6.0%;P= 0.005). Mean length of stay was significantly higher in European studies (MD = 2.7 days, 95% CI:0.6-4.8;P= 0.010), Asian studies (MD = 3.3 days, 95% CI: 0.5–6.0;P= 0.022), multicenter studies (MD = 4.8 days, 95% CI: 2.4–7.3;P< 0.001) and registry-based studies (MD = 8.4 days, 95% CI:1.6–15.1;P= 0.015), while it was lower in North American studies(MD = -6.7 days, 95% CI: -8.9 to -4.5;P< 0.001). A 10% increase in ASA III/IV proportion was associated with a higher incidence ofoverall complications (MD = 3.4%, 95% CI: 1.4%–5.3%;P= 0.001).The number of retrieved studies was not enough to justify multivariate meta-regression for complications other than CR-POPF. Results of meta-regression analyses for other complications are presented in Tables S1–7. CR-POPF incidence was significantly higher in European studies (MD = 5.8%, 95% CI 1.7%–9.9%;P= 0.005)and multicenter studies (MD = 5.6%, 95% CI 1.8%–9.4%;P= 0.004),while a 5-year increase in average patient age was associated with a 5% increase in CR-POPF (95% CI: 3.0%-7.0%;P< 0.001). However,in the multivariate analysis (Table S8) only the average patient age retained a significant and independent association with CR-POPF incidence (adjusted MD = 4.3% per unit increase, 95% CI: 1.5%–7.1%;P= 0.002).

    Table 1 Pre- and intraoperative variables in included studies.

    Table 2 Postoperative surgical and medical complications of participants in included studies.

    Discussion

    To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis on modern era PDs, focusing on postoperative complications, including studies with open and minimally invasive PDs, irrespective of reconstruction technique and other patient factors. Both randomized control trials and non-randomized studies were included according to the Cochrane Handbook [15] for systematic reviews addressing adverse effects of interventions. The rationale behind this approach was to avoid possible exclusion of participants that have a priori higher risk of complications. Such participants, as well as patients requiring additional procedures such as vascular resections, will most likely only be included in non-randomized studies.

    Fig. 2. Forest plot for 30-day mortality. 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.

    Notably, the rate of ASA III/IV patients in this meta-analysis is 35.7% which comes in contrast with large registries reporting rates as low as 9% [ 88 , 89 ]. Moreover, a high rate of ASA III/IV (80%) reported from the US is linked with a lower mortality(1.3%) than Germany (5.7%) where ASA III/IV rate of 48% has been reported [88] . This variation is most likely due to different interpretation by doctors or data managers and warrants clarification in future studies. The pooled incidence of overall complications in our study was 54.7%, which is similar to the overall complication rate of 52.9% reported in a recent large retrospective study of 13 110 PDs from the ACS-NSQIP (National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database in the USA [90] . Serious complications, strictly defined as complications of severity according to Clavien-Dindo ≥III occurred in 25.5% of the patients included in this meta-analysis. This is in agreement with the recent report of 4 large registries of pancreatic surgery of the US and Europe reporting rates between 20.3% and 31.5% [88] . Our pooled 30-day mortality and CR-POPF rates compare favorably to those reported from the ACS-NSQIP database and the transatlantic registries report [ 88 , 90 ]. The multivariate analysis shows that the differences in the rates of CR-POPF can be partially explained by variability in the mean age of patients included in individual studies. Older age is linked with higher rates of pancreatic fistulas [91–93] . Unfortunately, the volume of our data precluded multivariate analysis of other meaningful factors such as sex, ASA class, BMI, neoadjuvant treatment, pancreatic duct size, soft pancreas etc. These variables have reported rates of 10%–90% in individual studies included in our meta-analysis, which represent well recognized risk factors for POPF and account largely for the variability of POPF rates between studies. This is also supported by a recent meta-analysis of risk factors for POPF where the use of a prospective international registry,rather than data from small single or multicenter studies, is recommended in order to define and understand better the variation in practice and to avoid the likelihood of publication bias [94] .

    A pooled estimate of 12.1% for vascular resections has been calculated, which is in agreement with the rates reported from a large Japanese and European registries and slightly higher than that reported from the NSQIP database and the Swedish registry( ~19%) [ 88 , 89 , 95 ]. However, the impact of vascular resections on postoperative morbidity and mortality is not clear yet. Data from at least one large study from Asia show no impact on postoperative mortality despite higher intraoperative blood loss and longer operative time but there is also evidence from a USA study showing higher postoperative mortality and morbidity after vascular reconstructions [96] . These results warrant further investigation.

    A substantial difference was noted in the length of stay among reports from the USA, Netherlands and our pooled mean (median length of stay of 8 days compared to our pooled mean length of stay of 14.8 days) [88] . A shorter length of stay in centers from North America was also identified in our meta-regression analysis (MD = -6.7 days, compared to studies performed elsewhere).In those reports, shorter hospital stay is associated with higher readmission rates. A recent meta-analysis sets the true benchmark for readmission rate after pancreatic resection between 19% and 20% which matches our pooled estimate (60/90-day readmission of 19.5%) for this variable [97] . In this study, the authors recognize the complex association between center volume and readmission rates.Studies from higher volume centers might report higher, lower or comparable readmission rates because they are more likely to miss readmissions in hospitals outside their emergency care catchment area or because they are more likely to accept more complex and high risk patients from their low volume counterparts or even because they have lower mortality rates; thus more patients at risk for readmission [98] . Readmissions after pancreatic resection are either due to infections or inability to maintain hydration and nutrition and there is evidence that multidisciplinary patient education and post-discharge monitoring can reduce readmissions to more than 50% [99–102] .

    Fig. 3. Forest plot for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.

    Fig. 4. Forest plot for length of stay. 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.

    Table 3 Univariate meta-regression analysis investigating study moderators potentially contributing to between-study heterogeneity.

    A central theme of the present study was that PD outcomes reported worldwide in the last decade have substantial heterogeneity similar to other major operations such as hepatectomies [103] and esophagectomies [104] . Our results are in line with recent metaanalyses of randomized trials comparing pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy [105] and laparoscopic versus open PD [106] that both showed marked heterogeneity attributed to multiple perioperative factors. Thereby, the pooled rates given in this meta-analysis as indicative of the burden of modern era PD should be interpreted with caution and, in high volume centers,where reliable complication rates can be calculated, it is probably preferable to inform the patients preoperatively about the risks of this procedure based on local data, rather than using heterogeneous results from the literature. Meta-regression showed that European studies reported a higher incidence of overall complications, CR-POPF, DGE, PPH, bile leak, reoperation and longer length of stay and that multicenter studies had higher incidence of serious complications, CR-POPF, DGE and longer length of stay, but a lower incidence of bile leaks. This is perhaps due to the fact that multicenter studies are usually more organized and systematic in reporting complications compared to single-center studies.

    Another finding of our study is the wide range of complication definitions which has been stressed out as a problem by another study [107] , which concludes that well-defined outcome parameters in future RCTs are mandatory to reduce heterogeneity [105] . In this systematic review we included studies in which predetermined criteria were used. CR-POPF was used as a main outcome instead of overall POPF incidence, because grade B and C definitions remained almost intact after the 2016 modification by the ISGPS [ 8 , 108 ]. Biochemical leak, on the other hand, is no longer reported as a POPF in recent studies, which may be causing significant variations in overall POPF incidence in the last decade. Moreover, our subgroup analyses by different definitions of complications did not reduce heterogeneity in the reported outcomes. This is probably due to the multifactorial nature of the problem.

    Our study has limitations. Although we attempted to explain the observed heterogeneity, its extent limited the generalization of our findings. Because of the relatively small number of primary studies, multivariate meta-regression was deemed unreliable and was not performed for outcomes other than CR-POPF. We were unable to examine if regional differences in the incidences of complications other than CR-POPF that were detected in univariate analyses might be explained by other characteristics of the studies related to the case-mix of the patients included. Moreover, no studies reported whether some patients experienced multiple postoperative complications and it is impossible to know if the overall complication rate involved a summary of multiple complications recorded in a few patients or a true percentage arising from a single complication from each study participant. Risk of bias assessment was performed only at the study level but not at the outcome level. Another limitation is that we arbitrarily chose to include studies involving more than 100 participants, excluding studies reporting outcomes from low-volume pancreatic centers.Finally, due to our strict inclusion criteria, well conducted trials might have been excluded from the meta-analysis despite the fact that they were published during the study period [109] .

    In conclusion, this systematic review reported pooled rates of complications after modern PD. Our estimates of complication rates are useful as points of reference for pancreatic units worldwide, regarding the state of contemporary PD today and to inform surgical candidates preoperatively about the potential risks after this major operation. However, this should be done with caution as substantial heterogeneity was observed in reported complication rates and outcomes worldwide.

    Acknowledgments

    We thank Ms Ruth Monkman for language editing the manuscript.

    CRediT authorship contribution statement

    Stamatios Kokkinakis: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.Evangelos I Kritsotakis: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – review & editing. Neofytos Maliotis: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Validation. Ioannis Karageorgiou: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology. Emmanuel Chrysos: Project administration. Konstantinos Lasithiotakis: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources,Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

    Funding

    None.

    Ethical approval

    Not needed.

    Competing interest

    No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.

    Supplementary materials

    Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi: 10.1016/j.hbpd.2022.04.006 .

    av超薄肉色丝袜交足视频| 国产不卡一卡二| 性欧美人与动物交配| 久久久国产成人免费| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 成人欧美大片| 看免费av毛片| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 久久影院123| 大码成人一级视频| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 亚洲五月天丁香| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久 | 久久香蕉国产精品| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 天天一区二区日本电影三级 | 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 看黄色毛片网站| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 日本a在线网址| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 男女做爰动态图高潮gif福利片 | 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 9色porny在线观看| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一出视频| 窝窝影院91人妻| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 色在线成人网| 脱女人内裤的视频| 国产精品久久视频播放| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 久久人妻av系列| 中文字幕色久视频| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 大香蕉久久成人网| 国产精品九九99| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费 | 色播在线永久视频| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 最好的美女福利视频网| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 中文字幕高清在线视频| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 亚洲全国av大片| www日本在线高清视频| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 一本久久中文字幕| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 在线免费观看的www视频| 亚洲片人在线观看| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 日本欧美视频一区| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 一进一出抽搐动态| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 在线观看一区二区三区| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 国产精品免费视频内射| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 美国免费a级毛片| 欧美日本视频| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 91av网站免费观看| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 午夜福利高清视频| netflix在线观看网站| 在线国产一区二区在线| 午夜免费鲁丝| 成人国语在线视频| 日韩有码中文字幕| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影 | www.www免费av| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 99re在线观看精品视频| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 97碰自拍视频| www.自偷自拍.com| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 无限看片的www在线观看| 国产免费男女视频| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 国产免费男女视频| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 午夜久久久久精精品| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 久久人妻av系列| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 两个人看的免费小视频| 国产精品永久免费网站| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 久9热在线精品视频| 精品国产一区二区久久| 国产精品 国内视频| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 精品人妻1区二区| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 9热在线视频观看99| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 丁香六月欧美| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 欧美日韩精品网址| 手机成人av网站| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| av天堂久久9| 91大片在线观看| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 黄片播放在线免费| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 人人澡人人妻人| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 97碰自拍视频| 久久香蕉国产精品| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 9热在线视频观看99| 亚洲 欧美 日韩 在线 免费| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 伦理电影免费视频| 免费观看精品视频网站| 精品国产国语对白av| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 久久 成人 亚洲| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 无人区码免费观看不卡| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 中文字幕色久视频| aaaaa片日本免费| aaaaa片日本免费| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 欧美日本视频| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 丝袜美足系列| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 很黄的视频免费| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清 | 免费av毛片视频| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站 | 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 精品电影一区二区在线| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 丝袜美足系列| 免费少妇av软件| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 1024香蕉在线观看| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 咕卡用的链子| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 久9热在线精品视频| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 精品国产亚洲在线| 天堂√8在线中文| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 日本免费a在线| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| videosex国产| xxx96com| 亚洲 国产 在线| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 在线av久久热| 曰老女人黄片| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 亚洲全国av大片| 极品教师在线免费播放| 色av中文字幕| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 国产精品av久久久久免费| 性少妇av在线| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 午夜福利,免费看| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看 | 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 日日夜夜操网爽| 亚洲全国av大片| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 悠悠久久av| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 乱人伦中国视频| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 亚洲激情在线av| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| av免费在线观看网站| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久 | 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 最好的美女福利视频网| 88av欧美| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 午夜免费激情av| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区 | 我的亚洲天堂| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 中国美女看黄片| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av | 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 久久这里只有精品19| 超碰成人久久| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 精品高清国产在线一区| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 窝窝影院91人妻| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| a在线观看视频网站| 欧美日韩精品网址| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 9191精品国产免费久久| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 很黄的视频免费| 精品电影一区二区在线| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 久久婷婷成人综合色麻豆| 大香蕉久久成人网| 久久国产精品影院| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 日本欧美视频一区| 日韩有码中文字幕| 曰老女人黄片| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 91字幕亚洲| 大陆偷拍与自拍| svipshipincom国产片| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡 | 正在播放国产对白刺激| 丰满的人妻完整版| 国产单亲对白刺激| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费 | 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 99久久国产精品久久久| 成年版毛片免费区| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 午夜老司机福利片| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 国产高清有码在线观看视频 | 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 成人三级做爰电影| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 色播亚洲综合网| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 午夜精品在线福利| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 搡老岳熟女国产| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 成人国产综合亚洲| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 脱女人内裤的视频| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 欧美日韩黄片免| 国产野战对白在线观看| 亚洲av成人av| 亚洲人成电影观看| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 无限看片的www在线观看| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 久久久久九九精品影院| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 久久亚洲真实| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 午夜福利欧美成人| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 黄色成人免费大全| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 久久 成人 亚洲| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 精品电影一区二区在线| 亚洲九九香蕉| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 嫩草影视91久久| 天天添夜夜摸| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 97碰自拍视频| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 热99re8久久精品国产| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 制服诱惑二区| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 两个人免费观看高清视频| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 午夜两性在线视频| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 深夜精品福利| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 久久香蕉激情| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 一a级毛片在线观看| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 999精品在线视频| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 手机成人av网站| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看 | 亚洲伊人色综图| 电影成人av| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 日本三级黄在线观看| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 亚洲第一av免费看| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频 | 91成人精品电影| 成人国语在线视频| 日本五十路高清| 午夜免费激情av| 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| 操出白浆在线播放| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 级片在线观看| av天堂在线播放| 很黄的视频免费| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 99香蕉大伊视频| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 999精品在线视频| 一区在线观看完整版| 亚洲成人久久性| 成人手机av| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2 | 久久这里只有精品19| av天堂在线播放| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 精品久久久久久,| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 91成人精品电影| 午夜老司机福利片| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 成人精品一区二区免费| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 欧美日本视频| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 国产片内射在线| 国产成人系列免费观看| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片 | 在线观看日韩欧美| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 亚洲无线在线观看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 亚洲 欧美 日韩 在线 免费| www.www免费av| av电影中文网址| 韩国av一区二区三区四区| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 脱女人内裤的视频| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 久久香蕉激情| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 欧美日韩精品网址| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 午夜影院日韩av| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 悠悠久久av| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 成人国产综合亚洲| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av | 国产成人精品在线电影| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 成在线人永久免费视频| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 91精品三级在线观看| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 国产精品永久免费网站| av欧美777| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 免费不卡黄色视频| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 老司机靠b影院| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 国产精品免费视频内射| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 成在线人永久免费视频| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 怎么达到女性高潮| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 午夜激情av网站| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 99久久国产精品久久久| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 电影成人av| www日本在线高清视频| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 久久青草综合色| 91精品三级在线观看| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清 | 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 欧美午夜高清在线| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 久久香蕉国产精品| 精品国产国语对白av| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| www日本在线高清视频| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 午夜激情av网站| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 成年版毛片免费区|