Suppr超能文献

三孔与标准四孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术:尼泊尔东部一家社区教学医院的随机对照临床试验

Three-port versus standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled clinical trial in a community-based teaching hospital in eastern Nepal.

作者信息

Kumar Manoj, Agrawal Chandra Shekhar, Gupta Rakesh Kumar

机构信息

Department of Surgery, B P Koirala Institute of Health Sciences, Dharan, Nepal.

出版信息

JSLS. 2007 Jul-Sep;11(3):358-62.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

With increasing surgeon experience, laparoscopic cholecystectomy has undergone many refinements including reduction in port number and size. Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been reported to be safe and feasible in various clinical trials. However, whether it offers any additional advantages remains controversial. This study reports a randomized trial that compared the clinical outcomes of 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Seventy-five consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to undergo either the 3-port or the 4-port technique. Four surgical tapes were applied to standard 4-port sites in both groups at the end of the operation. All dressings were kept intact until the first follow-up 1 week after surgery. Postoperative pain at the 4 sites was assessed on the first day after surgery by using a 10-cm unscaled visual analog scale (VAS). Other outcome measures included analgesia requirements, length of the operation, postoperative stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars.

RESULTS

Demographic data were comparable for both groups. Patients in the 3-port group had shorter mean operative time (47.3+/-29.8 min vs 60.8+/-32.3 min) for the 4-port group (P=0.04) and less pain at port sites (mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 2.19+/-1.06 vs 2.91+/-1.20 (P=0.02). Overall pain score, analgesia requirements, hospital stay, and patient satisfaction score (mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 8.2+/-1.7 vs 7.8+/-1.7, P=0.24) on surgery and scars were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy resulted in less individual port-site pain and similar clinical outcomes with fewer surgical scars and without any increased risk of bile duct injury compared with 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thus, it can be recommended as a safe alternative procedure in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

摘要

目的

随着外科医生经验的增加,腹腔镜胆囊切除术有了许多改进,包括减少切口数量和尺寸。在各种临床试验中,三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术已被报道是安全可行的。然而,它是否具有任何额外优势仍存在争议。本研究报告了一项随机试验,比较了三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术与传统四孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床结果。

方法

连续75例行择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者被随机分为接受三孔或四孔技术组。两组在手术结束时均在标准的四个四孔部位粘贴四条手术胶带。所有敷料在术后1周首次随访前保持完整。术后第一天使用10厘米无刻度视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估四个部位的术后疼痛。其他结果指标包括镇痛需求、手术时间、术后住院时间以及患者对手术和瘢痕的满意度评分。

结果

两组的人口统计学数据具有可比性。三孔组患者的平均手术时间比四孔组短(47.3±29.8分钟对60.8±32.3分钟,P = 0.04),且切口部位疼痛较轻(使用10厘米无刻度VAS的平均评分:2.19±1.06对2.91±1.20,P = 0.02)。两组在手术和瘢痕方面的总体疼痛评分、镇痛需求、住院时间以及患者满意度评分(使用10厘米无刻度VAS的平均评分:8.2±1.7对7.8±1.7,P = 0.24)相似。

结论

与四孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术相比,三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术导致个体切口部位疼痛较轻,临床结果相似,手术瘢痕较少,且胆管损伤风险未增加。因此,在择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术中,它可被推荐为一种安全的替代手术。

相似文献

2
Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1624-7. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8718-9. Epub 2003 Jul 21.
9
Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized prospective study.
J Surg Res. 2011 Apr;166(2):e109-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2010.11.885. Epub 2010 Dec 22.
10
Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain.
Br J Surg. 2011 Jul;98(7):991-5. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7486. Epub 2011 Apr 27.

引用本文的文献

2
Risk Factors for Difficult Three-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.
Cureus. 2024 Oct 17;16(10):e71680. doi: 10.7759/cureus.71680. eCollection 2024 Oct.
4
Automatic patient positioning based on robot rotational workspace for extended reality.
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2023 Nov;18(11):1951-1959. doi: 10.1007/s11548-023-02967-2. Epub 2023 Jun 9.
6
Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of three-port vs four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (level 1 evidence).
Updates Surg. 2021 Apr;73(2):451-471. doi: 10.1007/s13304-021-00982-z. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
7
A Comparative Study of Single Incision versus Conventional Four Ports Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.
J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Oct;10(10):PC06-PC09. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/19982.8601. Epub 2016 Oct 1.
8
Is the fourth port routinely required for laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Our three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy experience.
Ir J Med Sci. 2016 Nov;185(4):909-912. doi: 10.1007/s11845-016-1493-8. Epub 2016 Aug 31.
9
Techniques of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Nomenclature and selection.
J Minim Access Surg. 2015 Apr-Jun;11(2):113-8. doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.140220.
10
Safety and effectiveness of three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014 Aug 15;7(8):2339-42. eCollection 2014.

本文引用的文献

2
Minilaparoscopic and laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study.
Arch Surg. 2003 Sep;138(9):1017-23. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.138.9.1017.
3
Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1624-7. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8718-9. Epub 2003 Jul 21.
4
Three-port vs standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Surg Endosc. 2003 Sep;17(9):1434-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8713-1. Epub 2003 Jun 13.
5
Tip for microlaparoscopic cholecystectomy: easy removal of the gallbladder after laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the three-port technique.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2003 Apr;13(2):118-20. doi: 10.1097/00129689-200304000-00012.
6
A new technique for two-trocar laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Surg Endosc. 2002 Apr;16(4):589-91. doi: 10.1007/s00464-001-9090-x. Epub 2002 Jan 9.
7
Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind trial.
Surg Endosc. 2002 Mar;16(3):458-64. doi: 10.1007/s00464-001-9026-5. Epub 2001 Nov 16.
8
Two-trocar laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a reproducible technique.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2001 Aug;11(4):248-51. doi: 10.1097/00129689-200108000-00004.
9
Three-port microlaparoscopic cholecystectomy in 159 patients.
Surg Endosc. 2001 Mar;15(3):293-6. doi: 10.1007/s004640000302. Epub 2000 Dec 12.
10
A new method of laparoscopic cholecystectomy using three trocars combined with suture retraction of gallbladder.
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2001 Apr;11(2):85-8. doi: 10.1089/109264201750162310.

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