Suppr超能文献

三孔与标准四孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术

Three-port vs standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

作者信息

Trichak S

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Intravaloros Rd., Amphur Muang, Chiangai 50200, Thailand.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2003 Sep;17(9):1434-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8713-1. Epub 2003 Jun 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Since the first laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) was reported in 1990, it has met with widespread acceptance as a standard procedure using four trocars. The fourth (lateral) trocar is used to grasp the fundus of the gallbladder so as to expose Calot's triangle. It has been argued that the fourth trocar is not necessary in most cases. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the three-port vs the four-port technique.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2000, 200 consecutive patients undergoing elective LC for gallstone disease were randomized to be treated via either the three- or four-port technique.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the two groups in age, sex, or weight. In terms of outcome, there was no difference between the two groups in success rate, operating time, number of oral analgesic tablets (paracetamol), visual analogue score, or postoperative hospital stay; however, the three-port group required fewer analgesic injections (nalbuphine) (0.4 vs 0.77, p = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

The three-port technique is as safe as the standard four-port one for LC. The main advantages of the three-port technique are that it causes less pain, is less expensive, and leaves fewer scars.

摘要

背景

自1990年首次报道腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)以来,它作为一种使用四个套管针的标准手术已被广泛接受。第四个(外侧)套管针用于抓住胆囊底部,以便暴露Calot三角。有人认为在大多数情况下第四个套管针并非必要。因此,本研究的目的是比较三孔技术与四孔技术。

方法

在1998年至2000年期间,将200例因胆结石疾病接受择期LC的连续患者随机分为接受三孔技术或四孔技术治疗。

结果

两组在年龄、性别或体重方面无差异。在结果方面,两组在成功率、手术时间、口服止痛片(对乙酰氨基酚)数量、视觉模拟评分或术后住院时间方面无差异;然而,三孔组所需的止痛注射剂(纳布啡)较少(0.4对0.77,p = 0.024)。

结论

对于LC,三孔技术与标准的四孔技术一样安全。三孔技术的主要优点是疼痛较轻、费用较低且疤痕较少。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验