Khaikin M, Schneidereit N, Cera S, Sands D, Efron J, Weiss E G, Nogueras J J, Vernava A M, Wexner S D
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2007 May;21(5):742-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9212-1. Epub 2007 Mar 1.
Numerous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopy in the management of acute adhesive small-bowel obstruction (AASBO). However, comparative data with laparotomy are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy and laparotomy for the treatment of AASBO in terms of patient outcome and cost-effectiveness.
A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgery for AASBO from 1999 to 2005 was conducted. Data recorded included operative and postoperative course, among others. Operative and total hospital charges were estimated from the Patient Accounting System.
Thirty-one patients who underwent laparoscopy were matched to a similar group of patients who underwent laparotomy. In the laparoscopy group, four patients (13%) had a laparoscopy-assisted procedure and ten patients (32%) were converted. The laparoscopy group was subdivided into laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, converted, and assisted-converted subgroups. In the majority of the patients, AASBO was secondary to a single band. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the laparotomy group (p = 0.007). Morbidity rates were statistically significant between the laparoscopy and assisted-converted subgroups (p = 0.0001) but not between the laparotomy group and assisted-converted subgroup (p = 0.19). Median hospital stay and median time to first bowel movement were significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group. Charge data were available for only the last three years of the study. Operative charges and total hospital charges were similar between the laparoscopy and the laparotomy groups (p = 0.14 and p = 0.10, respectively). There was a significant difference in total hospital charges between the laparoscopy subgroup and laparotomy group (p = 0.03).
Laparoscopy for AASBO is associated with reduced hospital stay, early recovery, and decreased morbidity. Laparoscopy-assisted and converted surgeries do not differ significantly from laparotomy in regard to patient outcome. Operative and total hospital charges are similar for both laparoscopy and laparotomy.
大量研究已证明腹腔镜检查在急性粘连性小肠梗阻(AASBO)治疗中的可行性。然而,缺乏与剖腹手术的对比数据。本研究的目的是在患者预后和成本效益方面比较腹腔镜检查和剖腹手术治疗AASBO的效果。
对1999年至2005年期间接受AASBO手术的所有患者进行回顾性病历审查。记录的数据包括手术和术后病程等。手术费用和总住院费用由患者计费系统估算得出。
31例行腹腔镜检查的患者与一组类似的接受剖腹手术的患者进行匹配。在腹腔镜检查组中,4例患者(13%)接受了腹腔镜辅助手术,10例患者(32%)中转开腹。腹腔镜检查组又细分为腹腔镜组、腹腔镜辅助组、中转开腹组和辅助中转开腹组。在大多数患者中,AASBO继发于单一粘连带。剖腹手术组的总体发病率显著更高(p = 0.007)。腹腔镜组和辅助中转开腹组之间的发病率有统计学显著差异(p = 0.0001),但剖腹手术组和辅助中转开腹组之间无显著差异(p = 0.19)。腹腔镜检查组的中位住院时间和首次排便的中位时间显著更短。仅研究的最后三年有费用数据。腹腔镜检查组和剖腹手术组之间的手术费用和总住院费用相似(分别为p = 0.14和p = 0.10)。腹腔镜检查组和剖腹手术组之间的总住院费用有显著差异(p = 0.03)。
AASBO的腹腔镜检查与缩短住院时间、早期恢复及发病率降低相关。腹腔镜辅助手术和中转开腹手术在患者预后方面与剖腹手术无显著差异。腹腔镜检查和剖腹手术的手术费用和总住院费用相似。