• <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 ?

    To explore the pathogenesis of anterior resection syndrome by magnetic resonance imaging rectal defecography

    2024-03-11 08:55:32LingHouMengXianWeiMoBingYuYangHaiQuanQinQingZhouSongXinXinHeQiangLiZhengWangChangLinMoGuoHaiYang

    Ling-Hou Meng, Xian-Wei Mo, Bing-Yu Yang, Hai-Quan Qin, Qing-Zhou Song, Xin-Xin He, Qiang Li, Zheng Wang, Chang-Lin Mo, Guo-Hai Yang

    Abstract BACKGROUND Over 90% of rectal cancer patients develop low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after sphincter-preserving resection. The current globally recognized evaluation method has many drawbacks and its subjectivity is too strong, which hinders the research and treatment of LARS.AIM To evaluate the anorectal function after colorectal cancer surgery by quantifying the index of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defecography, and pathogenesis of LARS.METHODS We evaluated 34 patients using the standard LARS score, and a new LARS evaluation index was established using the dynamic images of MRI defecography to verify the LARS score.RESULTS In the LARS score model, there were 10 (29.41%) mild and 24 (70.58%) severe cases of LARS. The comparison of defecation rate between the two groups was 29.36 ± 14.17% versus 46.83 ± 18.62% (P = 0.004); and MRI-rectal compliance (MRI-RC) score was 3.63 ± 1.96 versus 7.0 ± 3.21 (P = 0.001). Severe and mild LARS had significant differences using the two evaluation methods. There was a significant negative correlation between LARS and MRI-RC score (P < 0.001), and they had a negative correlation with defecation rate (P = 0.028).CONCLUSION MRI defecography and standard LARS score can both be used as an evaluation index to study the pathogenesis of LARS.

    Key Words: Anterior resection syndrome; Colorectal cancer; Diagnostic evaluation system; Magnetic resonance imaging defecography; Pathogenesis

    INTRODUCTION

    Patients diagnosed with lower rectal cancer who require sphincter-preserving resection (SPR) have a high risk of postoperative decline in anorectal function. After long-term follow-up after SPR[1,2], > 90% of rectal cancer patients experienced suboptimal recovery of anorectal function, characterized by increased defecation frequency, higher incidence of encopresis, and incontinence of liquid or solid stools, collectively referred to as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS)[3]. Postoperative intestinal dysfunction is a prevalent occurrence in patients with rectal cancer, with an incidence rate ranging from 70% to 90%. Such dysfunction may manifest as periodic alterations in stool consistency, transitioning from dry and rigid to pasty, thereby significantly compromising quality of life[4]. This symptom has been a persistent source of distress for numerous patients, and its resolution without efficacious treatment measures has led to a cascade of physical and psychological ailments[5]. Efficient enhancement of postoperative anorectal function is of utmost importance. Numerous studies on anal function have failed to provide a comprehensive explanation and precise evaluation of postoperative anorectal function impairment. Currently, the evaluation of LARS symptoms in patients is solely reliant on subjective measures, such as questionnaires. There is a lack of a standardized and objective medical assessment index, as well as an absence of an objective index for the systematic classification and grading of symptoms[6]. Consequently, the evaluation and analysis of diagnostic and therapeutic measures for patients with LARS are limited, leading to a dearth of investigations on the prevention and treatment of LARS following anal preservation for rectal cancer. This has resulted in the absence of effective objective evaluation criteria, thereby impeding the progress of research on LARS prevention and treatment over an extended period. Exploration of defecography to assess and quantify compliance of the neorectum after lower rectal cancer surgery is a valuable approach to establish objective diagnostic criteria for LARS rectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defecography, and the pathogenesis of LARS by imaging index.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Study population

    The research cohort comprised 34 patients, aged 18-76 years, who had been diagnosed with lower rectal cancer and had undergone total mesorectal excision (TME) and one-stage intestinal anastomosis within 12 months prior to enrollment. Patients were diagnosed with rectal cancer that was amenable to surgical resection, and whose tumors were situated below the S2 level with a lower margin within 5 cm of the dentate line. The preoperative rectal MRI measurement of the mean distance between the lower border of the tumor and the anal margin was 4.12 ± 1.04 cm. The pathological classification of the observed condition was adenocarcinoma. The diagnosis of T1-3, negative mesorectal fascia or extramural vascular invasion was determined through rectal MRI. Patients were excluded if they had distant organ metastases, severe cardiac or pulmonary medical disease, gastrointestinal dysfunction or motility disorders, or metabolic, neurogenic or endocrine disease known to cause colonic motility disorders. Patients with anastomotic leakage or requiring multiple dilations of the anastomotic stricture were also excluded. The present study recruited a control group consisting of 26 healthy volunteers, aged 18-60 years, who underwent MRI defecography at the hospital where the research was conducted. The control group exhibited regular bowel patterns, characterized by a frequency of three bowel movements per day to one every 3 d, and was devoid of any gastrointestinal symptoms. The medical records, follow-up data, and postoperative pathology of the patients were comprehensive. The patients were duly informed and provided their consent by signing the informed consent form, subsequently returning to the hospital for the LARS questionnaire and MRI defecography imaging assessment after surgery. The treatment process was consistently overseen by the same surgical team, ensuring uniformity in all procedures and follow-up.

    Evaluation of neorectal defecation frequency and MRI-rectal compliance through MRI defecography

    Prior to the examination, a standard bowel cleansing protocol was implemented and the bladder was voided 30 min prior to the procedure. The patient assumed a supine position with the head advanced, both arms elevated, and the knees elevated to induce flexion in the lower limbs, followed by administration of static and dynamic MRI scans of the rectum. The United Imaging 1.5 T superconducting MRI served as the examination tool. The pelvic examination site was equipped with an abdominal phased-array coil, and the initial scan conducted was the resting sagittal T2-weighted imaging (T2WI). Subsequently, transverse-axis T2WI, which was perpendicular to the long axis of the anal canal, and oblique coronal T2WI, which was parallel to the long axis of the anal canal, were scanned in the median sagittal position. Prior to the injection of the ultrasonic coupling agent, a predetermined amount of 150-250 mL was weighed and administered through the anal canal. The sagittal localization image was rescanned, and fast imaging employing steady acquisition sequence dynamic defecography scan was performed in the median sagittal position. Patients were instructed to forcefully evacuate the bowel until it was emptied and perform an anal lift. Single-excitation, fast spin-echo sequence T2WI, and resting and maximum force evacuation images were taken in the median sagittal position for dynamic realtime MRI, which lasted 68 s. Finally, the transverse axis of T2WI was scanned; and the coronal dynamic Valsalva maneuver images were also scanned if necessary. The scan layer thickness was 15 mm, interval 0 mm, matrix 272 × 85, and field-of-view 250 × 250. The coupling agent that was discharged from the patient was gathered and reweighed, and the ratio between the mass of the discharged and injected coupling agents was determined as the defecation rate.

    Rectal compliance was assessed using the five-line partition scoring method, and the dynamic images were captured. Six diameters perpendicular to the midline of the intestinal canal were made along the sacral intervertebral space, and the midline and vertical line of the intestinal canal were divided into five regions. Each region was represented by the letters A-E, and each region was defined as two points. The intestinal wall motion of each region was observed during force exclusion. The score of the area can be defined when there is a significant swing of the intestinal wall during defecation (Figures 1 and 2).

    Method of follow-up

    There was an average follow-up time of 18 months for anal defecation, during which the subjective index of the severity of LARS after the operation was obtained using the LARS Score developed by Danish scholar Emmertsen in 2012[7]. A lower score was indicative of milder symptoms, while a higher score was associated with more severe symptoms. For instance, a score of 0-20 was indicative of mild LARS, 21-29 suggested moderate LARS, and 30-42 indicated severe LARS (Figure 3).

    Figure 1 Rectal compliance was assessed by five-line partition scoring. A: The shape of the wall of the intestine in the area where the bowel was at rest; B: Continuous contraction and relaxation of the intestinal wall in the area where the contrast agent passes through the intestine.

    Figure 4 Relationship between postoperative Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score and magnetic resonance imaging-rectal compliance score. LARS: Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging.

    Figure 5 Relationship between postoperative Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score and defecation rate. LARS: Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score.

    Statistical analysis

    SPSS version 26 was used for statistical analysis. The measurement data for the experimental and control groups were presented as mean ± SD. Comparison between groups was conducted using the independent samplettest, while the correlation analysis in the experimental group was performed using Pearson correlation analysis.P≤ 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

    Biostatistics statement

    The statistical methods of this study were reviewed by a member of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health from Guangxi Medical University.

    RESULTS

    The LARS scores of each patient in the experimental cohort were consistently monitored at 6 and 12 months post-surgery: 37.02 ± 3.43vs32.58 ± 4.91 (P< 0.001). The MRI defecation rate and MRI-rectal compliance (MRI-RC) score were utilized to analyze the 34 patients in the experimental group. The MRI defecation rate was 39.47 ± 0.15%vs35.53 ± 0.17% (P= 0.411), and the MRI-RC score was 4.41 ± 2.40vs4.82 ± 2.92 (P= 0.165) 6 and 12 months after surgery, respectively (Table 1). Despite a decrease in the LARS score, the actual anorectal function was not accurately assessed.

    Table 1 Evaluation of three different methods in the experimental group 6 months after operation and 12 months after operation

    The average MRI-RC score and defecation rate in the control group were 8.88 ± 0.90 and 61.19 ± 0.86%, respectively. The MRI-RC score and MRI defecation rate were compared between the experimental and control groups. The experimental group had significantly lower scores for MRI-RC (4.82 ± 2.92vs8.88 ± 0.90;P< 0.001) and defecation rate (35.53 ± 0.17%vs61.19 ± 0.86%;P= 0.007) (Table 2). These findings suggest that there was a notable difference in neorectal function between postoperative patients and normal subjects. Based on the LARS scores, the cohort of 34 patients was stratified into the severe LARS group (n= 24) and mild LARS group (n= 10). There was a significant difference in defecation rates between the two groups: 29.36 ± 14·17%vs46.83 ± 18.62% for the severe and mild group, respectively (P= 0.004). Additionally, the MRI-RC score was significantly lower in the severe group (3.63 ± 1.96) compared with the mild group (7.0 ± 3.21) (P= 0.001) (Table 3). There was a significant relationship between severe and mild LARS as assessed by the two methods. Specifically, the LARS score and MRI-RC score showed a significant negative correlation (P< 0.001) and were negatively correlated with defecation rate (P= 0.028). Both the LARS score and MRI defecography had the same evaluation effectiveness, as demonstrated in Figures 4 and 5.

    Table 2 Analysis of the relationship between defecation rate and magnetic resonance imaging-rectal compliance score between experimental group and control group

    Table 3 Analysis of the relationship between defecation rate and magnetic resonance imaging-rectal compliance score in severe group and mild group

    DISCUSSION

    In experimental model, we used LARS scoring scale which is globally accepted for modeling. Long-term follow-up indicates that patients’ perception of LARS-related symptoms evolves over time, with some patients experiencing gradual relief of their symptoms, while others continue to experience LARS symptoms for an extended period. By evaluating the anal function of 34 patients at different time points after surgery, we found that LARS was not a short-term intestinal adaptation process but rather a potentially permanent pathogenic mechanism[8]. However, the LARS score showed subjective variance and immediacy among patients, rendering an accurate and objective evaluation of symptom severity unattainable. Consequently, we developed an imaging-based observation data model that facilitated detection of LARS score in a more intuitive manner. To ascertain the efficacy of the model, we enlisted 26 individuals who were in good health, and subsequently compared them with patients diagnosed with LARS. The data outcomes showed variance in defecation rate and MRI-RC between LARS patients and healthy volunteers. The imaging model successfully identified mild and severe LARS patients, revealing significant differences in defecation rate and MRI-RC score between the two groups. These findings suggest that the newly proposed evaluation model is comparable in effectiveness to the LARS score. Therefore, MRI defecography can be used to study LARS more intuitively compared with LARS score.

    Defecation is a complex physiological process that includes synergistic movement of anal inner and outer sphincters, colorectal movement, and neurohormones.Abnormalities in one of the links are highly likely to cause defecation dysfunction[9]. However, the pathophysiological mechanism of LARS remains unclear. Recent research indicates that the pathogenesis may have a strong correlation with the perirectal nerve, muscle injury, neorectal volume, and intestinal compliance, with the latter being potentially the most important factor[10-13]. A considerable quantity of striplike scar images were detected in the postoperative computed tomography images of the pre-rectal sacral soft tissues in most patients. These scar tissues were observed to be firmly attached to the bowel during the surgical procedure, leading to a marked decrease in bowel compliance[14,15]. Currently, the LARS score, multiple quality of life score, fecal incontinence score, anorectal manometry, and other techniques are predominantly used; however, these methods exhibit numerous drawbacks in their clinical application[16,17]. There are cultural differences in the evaluation of the symptoms through the LARS score[18]. Despite the widespread use of language and text processing in our country[19], the subjective nature of this approach may result in clinical evaluations that do not align with the actual symptoms in some cases. In clinical settings, the variability of successive measurements for a single patient and the inability of examination results to accurately reflect the long-term function of the intestinal tube pose significant challenges to the research and treatment of LARS[12,20]. This study used rectal MRI defecography to quantify relevant indices and analyze the pathophysiological characteristics of LARS, with the aim of proposing a novel method for assessing intestinal dysfunction following TME. By comparison with normal subjects, rectal MRI defecography showed that neorectal movement characteristics after TME were different from those of normal subjects, in which there were more variations in the defecation process in patients with severe LARS symptoms. In static images, the presacral structure of normal mesenteric tissue was funnel-shaped, and the neorectum formed adhesions due to the unclear presacral structure after TME. In dynamic images, the neorectum had a low degree of activity because of adhesion, and the loss of intestinal pressure gradient conversion led to insufficient defecation. To confirm the variation in defecation after TME, imaging observation of intestinal activity and comparative study of defecation rate showed that the new method directly evaluated the functional status of the neorectum during defecation and complemented LARS score.

    Prior research has solely relied on the LARS score, which is primarily influenced by patients’ subjective perceptions, to assess defecation dysfunction[21]. The LARS score gradually tends towards a stable value 6 months after surgery, and tends to change from severe to moderate[22-24]. However, we found that the two groups of data did not reflect significant physiological changes in anorectal function in the new experimental model. The lower MRI-RC score reflects that decreased intestinal compliance is the main factor leading to defecation disorders and high LRAS scores. The intestinal motility and compliance were quantitatively analyzed by analyzing the range of motion of the intestinal wall in the dynamic images of MRI defecography combined with weighing the contrast medium. Defecation disorder mainly arises from three features: (1) The formation of a novel perirectal adhesion scar results in rectal stiffness, which impairs the normal physiological processes of contraction and dilatation. The severity of the symptoms associated with LARS is directly proportional to the length of the scar; (2) anastomotic stricture; and (3) the capacity to defecate voluntarily is solely dependent on the abdominal pressure generated by contraction of the abdominal muscles, resulting in disorganized defecation owing to the absence of bowel motility. This is because the rectum of normal people is generally empty and collapsed in a quiescent state. The movement of feces in the colon is usually caused by the reverse pressure gradient transformation of peristaltic waves and the movement mode dominated by the cyclic motor pattern (CMP) of the distal colon[25]. In order to prevent the defecation reflex caused by the rapid filling of the rectum in a short period of time, the above two control modes help to control normal defecation and abstinence[26,27]. The primary point of origin for CMP is located at the junction of the rectum and sigmoid[26]. Observation of patients with intestinal dysfunction after TME shows that, with consideration of the safety of the surgical margin, the upper incisional margin is usually 10 cm away from the tumor, so that the origin of CMP is inevitably removed. The lower digestive tract of patients in our study was reconstructed solely using the partial sigmoid colon and distal residual rectal anastomosis. Defecography images showed that the movement pattern was not observed during defecation, and the transformation process of the pressure gradient of the neorectum was out of balance. When the neorectum loses mesenteric tissue and adheres to the anterior sacrum, the capacity for transport of intestinal contents is reduced, and the next intestinal canal cannot be dilated effectively in the process of propulsion. As a result, a large amount of dynamic energy produced by abdominal pressure cannot be transferred continuously, resulting in the phenomenon of “squeezing toothpaste”. The decrease of the degree of dilatation and the range of movement can lead to a significant decrease in the maximum tolerance capacity of the intestine compared with the original rectum (the neorectal volume is fixed in a short time and the later stage increases the intestinal dilatation due to compensation). This is reflects in a decrease of intestinal compliance. For most patients with lower rectal cancer, neorectal compliance is decreased after surgery[14]. However, some scholars believe that the colonic transport capacity of patients with severe LARS is enhanced[28]. This is due to a significant increase in systolic pressure in the neorectum of severe LARS patients caused by increased adhesion tension[29]. In the late recovery of the neorectum, the intestinal canal forms a new pressure gradient, but the intestinal compliance is still not recovered; each defecation can only discharge a small amount of feces, and the intestinal pressure is temporarily reduced. The defecation reflex disappears, and when the intestines push forward a small amount of feces, a new defecation reflex leads to an increase in the number of defecations. Therefore, this phenomenon does not mean that the patient’s transport capacity is enhanced, but a sign of reduced intestinal compliance. However, it is worth noting that the loss of anterograde and retrograde CMP may also lead to different symptoms of LARS, such as stool retention and incontinence.

    Changes in the anatomical structure of the rectum and presacral fascia after surgery and the establishment of the neorectum cause LARS, which exists for a long time and cannot be cured by any intervention[30]. Research on LARS is mainly base on the subjective feelings of the patients. In the process of long-term tolerance and adaptation, the intestinal canal compensates to increase fecal storage capacity. That is, some patients report that their symptoms have improved, but in these patients, the size of the anastomosis must match the transport capacity of the neorectum in order to have such an effect. One year after TME, the LARS score of patients often returns to a moderate state, and the patients also return to normal work and life. However, defecography images showed that most of the patients still had difficult defecation process, so the evaluation of LARS symptoms could not accurately and objectively reflect the real state. The long-term observation of LARS symptoms does not necessarily indicate gradual recovery, but the adaptation of patients to form new defecation habits.

    One limitation of this study was the small sample size. There is heterogeneity in the defecation process of patients with severe LARS, indicating that a large sample size is needed for in-depth comparison in the future. All studies are conducted after intestinal preparation in advance, which is standard practice for defecography, but this may cause spontaneous contraction of the colon, and high-amplitude transmitted contractions may be associated with symptoms such as defecation urgency and incontinence[25]. In the future, it will be valuable to conduct a comprehensive assessment of anorectal function in conjunction with rectal defecography to determine other physiological features that may lead to LARS symptoms, such as neorectal mobility and anal sphincter dysfunction.

    The emergence of TME has improved the survival rate of patients with rectal cancer, but the separation of presacral tissue destroys the nervous tissue and aseptic inflammation of the wound leads to intestinal adhesion, which may be an important factor leading to LARS. Although the disease is curable, it can have long-term adverse consequences. The current LARS score method has many drawbacks and its subjectivity is too strong, which hinders research and treatment of LARS. To observe the intestinal compliance more intuitively and quantify it, we developed a five-line zoning scoring method that was more accurate than rectal manometry, and more in line with the true movement status of the intestine. However, the gold standard is still the subjective feelings of patients. We developed an innovative method of MRI defecography to evaluate and quantify neorectal compliance after low rectal cancer surgery. This enabled us to determine the severity of LARS after rectal cancer surgery using an objective clinical evaluation index, and will allow evaluation of future methods of prevention and treatment of LARS.

    CONCLUSION

    The novel evaluation method of MRI defecography has good potential for diagnosis and evaluation of LARS. It can compensate for the drawback of subjective assessment using the LARS score, and promote exploration of the pathogenesis of LARS.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research background

    Over 90% of rectal cancer patients develop low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after sphincter-preserving resection. Currently, the LARS score, multiple quality of life scores, fecal incontinence score, anorectal manometry, and other techniques are predominantly used to assess LARS.

    Research motivation

    The LARS score has many drawbacks and its subjectivity is too strong, which hinders research and treatment of LARS.

    Research objectives

    We aimed to establish a model comparable in effectiveness to the LARS score using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defecography, to quantify the severity of LARS, which would be more helpful for evaluation of prevention and treatment of LARS.

    Research methods

    We assessed 34 patients using the LARS score, and a new LARS evaluation index was established using the dynamic images of MRI defecography to verify the results of the LARS score.

    Research results

    Severe and mild LARS both differed significantly with the two evaluation methods. There was a significant negative correlation between LARS score and MRI-rectal compliance score, and a negative correlation with the defecation rate.

    Research conclusions

    MRI defecography and standard LARS scoring method may have similar evaluation effectiveness and can be used to study the pathogenesis of LARS.

    Research perspectives

    The pathological mechanism leading to LARS symptoms needs a comprehensive physiological study.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    We thank the Department of Radiology, Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital for their support of this study.

    FOOTNOTES

    Co-first authors:Ling-Hou Meng and Bing-Yu Yang.

    Author contributions:Qin HQ, He XX and Li Q collected the data; Wang Z, Mo CL, Song QZ and Yang GH analyzed the data; Mo CL and Mo XW discussed the results and revised the final manuscript. All authors critically revised the manuscript and approved of the final version. All authors had full access to all the data in the study and accept responsibility to submit for publication. Together, Meng LH and Yang BY paid the time and energy needed to complete the research and the final paper, assumed the related responsibilities and burdens, and completed the design, preparation, submission and other steps of this research. This also ensures that the quality and reliability of the paper is ultimately improved. And, Meng LH and Yang BY contributed efforts of equal substance throughout the research process, made the most significant intellectual contribution and contributed equally to this work. The choice of these researchers as co-authors acknowledges and respects this equal contribution, while recognizing the spirit of teamwork and collaboration of this study.

    Institutional review board statement:The study was reviewed and approved by the Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital (Guangxi).

    Informed consent statement:All study participants, or their legal guardian, provided informed written consent prior to study enrollment.

    Conflict-of-interest statement:There are no conflicts of interest to report.

    Data sharing statement:No additional data are available.

    STROBE statement:The authors have read the STROBE Statement-checklist of items, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the STROBE Statement-checklist of items.

    Open-Access:This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

    Country/Territory of origin:China

    ORCID number:Xian-Wei Mo 0000-0002-7910-9556.

    S-Editor:Qu XL

    L-Editor:A

    P-Editor:Zhao S

    狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 日本一本二区三区精品| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 国产av在哪里看| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 身体一侧抽搐| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 午夜久久久久精精品| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 久久精品成人免费网站| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品 | 久久99热这里只有精品18| 久久久久久人人人人人| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 精品福利观看| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 老司机靠b影院| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 国产熟女xx| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 国模一区二区三区四区视频 | 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 黄色成人免费大全| xxx96com| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 亚洲九九香蕉| av国产免费在线观看| 老司机靠b影院| 欧美日韩精品网址| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 88av欧美| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 长腿黑丝高跟| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 一区二区三区激情视频| 香蕉久久夜色| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 日本 欧美在线| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 老司机靠b影院| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 精品第一国产精品| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 国产高清有码在线观看视频 | 1024香蕉在线观看| 久久精品人妻少妇| 曰老女人黄片| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| svipshipincom国产片| 久久这里只有精品19| 久久久久九九精品影院| a级毛片a级免费在线| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 此物有八面人人有两片| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 成年免费大片在线观看| 香蕉国产在线看| 此物有八面人人有两片| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 久久久精品大字幕| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 免费看日本二区| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 一本久久中文字幕| 亚洲无线在线观看| 天堂√8在线中文| 波多野结衣高清作品| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| av福利片在线| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 欧美大码av| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 看免费av毛片| 中文字幕久久专区| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 成人欧美大片| 成人精品一区二区免费| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 亚洲最大成人中文| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 亚洲国产欧美网| xxx96com| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 免费观看精品视频网站| 脱女人内裤的视频| 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 热99re8久久精品国产| 久久这里只有精品19| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 欧美3d第一页| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产亚洲欧美98| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 亚洲avbb在线观看| www国产在线视频色| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 国产视频内射| 99热这里只有精品一区 | 亚洲片人在线观看| 日韩免费av在线播放| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 欧美日韩黄片免| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 久久精品人妻少妇| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 色在线成人网| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 亚洲九九香蕉| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 国产精品永久免费网站| 看免费av毛片| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆 | 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 免费av毛片视频| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 在线观看www视频免费| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看 | 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| www日本黄色视频网| 在线免费观看的www视频| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 草草在线视频免费看| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 久久这里只有精品中国| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 欧美大码av| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看 | av在线播放免费不卡| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 久久性视频一级片| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 男人舔奶头视频| 美女午夜性视频免费| 久久中文看片网| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 日本a在线网址| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 丁香六月欧美| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av | av超薄肉色丝袜交足视频| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 精品久久久久久成人av| 91老司机精品| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 久久香蕉精品热| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 香蕉av资源在线| 九九热线精品视视频播放| av视频在线观看入口| www.www免费av| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 国产免费男女视频| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| videosex国产| 国产av在哪里看| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 中文在线观看免费www的网站 | 国产高清激情床上av| a级毛片a级免费在线| 国产精品 国内视频| 校园春色视频在线观看| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 校园春色视频在线观看| 窝窝影院91人妻| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 久久久国产成人免费| 精品日产1卡2卡| 成人精品一区二区免费| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 亚洲18禁久久av| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 此物有八面人人有两片| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 国产精品久久视频播放| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 日本黄大片高清| 久久精品影院6| 一本一本综合久久| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| xxx96com| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 日本 欧美在线| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 舔av片在线| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 一本一本综合久久| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 老司机靠b影院| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| www.www免费av| 伦理电影免费视频| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av| 在线观看www视频免费| 欧美午夜高清在线| 俺也久久电影网| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 熟女电影av网| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 性欧美人与动物交配| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆 | 一本久久中文字幕| 99热这里只有精品一区 | 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 免费观看精品视频网站| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 1024视频免费在线观看| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 精品国产亚洲在线| 国产精品一及| 国产精品 国内视频| 国产片内射在线| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 中文在线观看免费www的网站 | 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 亚洲av成人一区二区三| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 亚洲无线在线观看| 国产成人av教育| 亚洲国产欧美网| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 免费看日本二区| 婷婷亚洲欧美| 午夜免费观看网址| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 中文资源天堂在线| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 1024手机看黄色片| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 超碰成人久久| 午夜a级毛片| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 欧美大码av| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 国产av不卡久久| 热99re8久久精品国产| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 国产三级在线视频| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看 | 88av欧美| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 特级一级黄色大片| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 国模一区二区三区四区视频 | 日本一本二区三区精品| 91字幕亚洲| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 免费在线观看亚洲国产| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 国产成人精品无人区| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产 | 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 我要搜黄色片| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 色综合站精品国产| www国产在线视频色| 国产精品久久久久久久电影 | 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 午夜福利高清视频| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 一级黄色大片毛片| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看| 嫩草影视91久久| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 成人国产综合亚洲| 久久中文看片网| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 999精品在线视频| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 9191精品国产免费久久| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频 | 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 中文在线观看免费www的网站 | 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 精品久久久久久成人av| 身体一侧抽搐| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 色av中文字幕| 国产黄片美女视频| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲| 禁无遮挡网站| 99国产精品99久久久久| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻 | 天堂√8在线中文| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| or卡值多少钱| 国产亚洲欧美98| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 国产精品野战在线观看| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免费看| 一本一本综合久久| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| av福利片在线| 婷婷亚洲欧美| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 91麻豆av在线| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| a在线观看视频网站| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频| 免费观看精品视频网站| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 欧美zozozo另类| 国产1区2区3区精品| av欧美777| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 久久国产精品影院| 成在线人永久免费视频| 观看免费一级毛片| 成人三级黄色视频| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看 | 在线观看舔阴道视频| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 草草在线视频免费看| 国产日本99.免费观看| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 亚洲色图av天堂| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 中文字幕久久专区| 99久久精品热视频| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 免费观看人在逋| 国产1区2区3区精品| 宅男免费午夜| 久久草成人影院| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 国产日本99.免费观看| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| av在线天堂中文字幕| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 91字幕亚洲| 久久性视频一级片| 国产精品免费视频内射| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 日日夜夜操网爽| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 成人三级做爰电影| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 无限看片的www在线观看| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 欧美在线黄色| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 亚洲全国av大片| 1024手机看黄色片| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 中文资源天堂在线| 一区二区三区激情视频| 夜夜爽天天搞| www日本在线高清视频| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 美女黄网站色视频| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 午夜影院日韩av| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 日本成人三级电影网站| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 欧美日韩精品网址| a级毛片在线看网站| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 色av中文字幕| av在线播放免费不卡| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 最好的美女福利视频网| 欧美色视频一区免费| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 午夜精品在线福利| 身体一侧抽搐| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 夜夜爽天天搞| 午夜激情av网站| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 看黄色毛片网站| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 久久 成人 亚洲| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 不卡av一区二区三区| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 手机成人av网站| 国产精品久久视频播放| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 两性夫妻黄色片| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 欧美色视频一区免费| 亚洲成人久久性| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 亚洲成人久久性| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 精品久久久久久成人av| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 免费在线观看完整版高清|