Brill Andrew, Ghosh Kathakali, Gunnarsson Candace, Rizzo John, Fullum Terrence, Maxey Craig, Brossette Stephen
California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2008 Apr;22(4):1112-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-9815-1. Epub 2008 Feb 23.
Recent reviews of the literature have concluded that additional, well-defined studies are required to clarify the superiority of laparoscopic or open surgery. This paper presents precise estimates of nosocomial infection risks associated with laparoscopic as compared to open surgery in three procedures: cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and hysterectomy.
A retrospective analysis was performed on 11,662 admissions from 22 hospitals that have a nosocomial infection monitoring system. The Nosocomial Infection Marker (NIMtrade mark, patent pending) was used to identify nosocomial infections during hospitalization and post discharge. The dataset was limited to admissions with laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy (32.7%), appendectomy (24.0%), or hysterectomy (43.3%) and was analyzed by source of infection: urinary tract, wounds, respiratory tract, bloodstream, and others. Single- and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to control for the following potentially confounding variables: gender, age, type of insurance, complexity of admission on presentation, admission through the emergency department, and hospital case mix index (CMI).
Analyses were based on 399 NIMs in 337 patients. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hysterectomy each reduced the overall odds of acquiring nosocomial infections by more than 50% (p < 0.01) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hysterectomy also resulted in statistically significantly fewer readmissions with nosocomial infections (p < 0.01). Excluding appendectomy, the odds ratio for laparoscopic versus open NIM-associated readmission was 0.346 (p < 0.01). Laparoscopic appendectomy did not significantly change the odds of acquiring nosocomial infections.
As compared to open surgery, laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hysterectomy are associated with statistically significantly lower risks for nosocomial infections. For appendectomy, when comparing open versus laparoscopic approaches, no differences in the rate of nosocomial infections were detected.
近期文献综述得出结论,需要进行更多明确的研究以阐明腹腔镜手术或开放手术的优越性。本文给出了与开放手术相比,腹腔镜手术在胆囊切除术、阑尾切除术和子宫切除术这三种手术中发生医院感染风险的精确估计。
对来自22家设有医院感染监测系统的医院的11,662例住院病例进行了回顾性分析。使用医院感染标志物(NIM商标,专利申请中)来识别住院期间和出院后的医院感染。数据集仅限于接受腹腔镜或开放胆囊切除术(32.7%)、阑尾切除术(24.0%)或子宫切除术(43.3%)的住院病例,并按感染源进行分析:泌尿道、伤口、呼吸道、血流及其他。进行单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析以控制以下潜在混杂变量:性别、年龄、保险类型、入院时病情复杂程度、通过急诊科入院以及医院病例组合指数(CMI)。
分析基于337例患者的399个NIM。腹腔镜胆囊切除术和子宫切除术均使发生医院感染的总体几率降低了50%以上(p < 0.01)。腹腔镜胆囊切除术和子宫切除术还使因医院感染再次入院的情况在统计学上显著减少(p < 0.01)。排除阑尾切除术后,腹腔镜手术与开放手术NIM相关再入院的比值比为0.346(p < 0.01)。腹腔镜阑尾切除术并未显著改变发生医院感染的几率。
与开放手术相比,腹腔镜胆囊切除术和子宫切除术在统计学上与显著更低的医院感染风险相关。对于阑尾切除术,比较开放手术与腹腔镜手术方法时,未检测到医院感染率的差异。