Suppr超能文献

针式腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术:一项系统评价

Needlescopic versus laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review.

作者信息

Sajid Muhammad Shafique, Khan Munir Ahmad, Cheek Elizabeth, Baig Mirza Khurrum

机构信息

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Worthing Hospital, Worthing, West Sussex, UK.

出版信息

Can J Surg. 2009 Apr;52(2):129-34.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Needlescopic appendectomies (NA) have been performed since the 1990s. We sought to systematically analyze trials comparing NA with laparoscopic appendectomies (LA) in the management of appendicitis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature. We compared and analyzed clinical trials on NA and LA to generate summative data expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD).

RESULTS

Of 5 retrieved trials from the electronic database 2 trials involving 412 patients met our inclusion criteria. In the fixed-effects models, NA took longer than LA, and this time difference was statistically significant: SMD 0.20 min, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.40, p = 0.030, z(1) = 2.09. In both fixed-and random-effects models, the difference in total hospital stay and in perioperative complications between the NA and LA groups were nonsignificant. Furthermore, in both fixed-and random-effects models, NA was associated with a higher conversion rate to open appendectomy than LA. There was no heterogeneity between the trials (Q = 0.34, p = 0.55).

CONCLUSION

Needlescopic appendectomy can be a safe and effective procedure for the management of appendicitis. It is comparable to LA in terms of hospital stay and perioperative complications. However, NA is associated with a longer duration of surgery and a higher conversion rate, indicating technical challenges of the procedure. Before recommending routine use of the needlescopic technique for appendectomy, a major multicentre randomized controlled trial is necessary.

摘要

背景

自20世纪90年代以来,已开展针式腹腔镜阑尾切除术(NA)。我们试图系统分析比较NA与腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)治疗阑尾炎的试验。

方法

我们对文献进行了系统评价。比较并分析了关于NA和LA的临床试验,以生成以标准化均数差值(SMD)表示的汇总数据。

结果

从电子数据库检索到的5项试验中,2项涉及412例患者的试验符合我们的纳入标准。在固定效应模型中,NA手术时间比LA长,且这种时间差异具有统计学意义:SMD为0.20分钟,95%置信区间为0.01 - 0.40,p = 0.030,z(1) = 2.09。在固定效应模型和随机效应模型中,NA组和LA组在总住院时间和围手术期并发症方面的差异均无统计学意义。此外,在固定效应模型和随机效应模型中,NA转为开腹阑尾切除术的比例高于LA。各试验之间无异质性(Q = 0.34,p = 0.55)。

结论

针式腹腔镜阑尾切除术对于阑尾炎的治疗可以是一种安全有效的手术方式。在住院时间和围手术期并发症方面与LA相当。然而,NA手术时间较长且中转率较高,表明该手术存在技术挑战。在推荐将针式腹腔镜技术常规用于阑尾切除术之前,有必要开展一项大型多中心随机对照试验。

相似文献

2
Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess.阑尾蜂窝织炎或脓肿的早期与延迟阑尾切除术
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 2;6(6):CD011670. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011670.pub2.
5
Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis.腹腔镜手术与开放手术治疗疑似阑尾炎
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(1):CD001546. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001546.
7
Laparoscopic surgery for elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.择期腹主动脉瘤修复的腹腔镜手术
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 4;5(5):CD012302. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012302.pub2.

引用本文的文献

6
Acute appendicitis: position paper, WSES, 2013.急性阑尾炎:立场文件,WSES,2013 年。
World J Emerg Surg. 2014 Apr 7;9(1):26. doi: 10.1186/1749-7922-9-26.
7
Feasibility of a combined percutaneous laparoscopic three-millimeter device.
JSLS. 2014 Jan-Mar;18(1):41-5. doi: 10.4293/108680813X13693422520161.
9
Acute appendicitis: what is the gold standard of treatment?急性阑尾炎:治疗的金标准是什么?
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Dec 21;19(47):8799-807. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i47.8799.

本文引用的文献

4
Needlescopic appendectomy.
Surg Endosc. 2003 Sep;17(9):1451-3. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8732-y. Epub 2003 Jun 19.
5
Minilaparoscopic appendectomy.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2001 Dec;11(6):351-5. doi: 10.1097/00129689-200112000-00002.
6
Mini-laparoscopic versus laparoscopic approach to appendectomy.
BMC Surg. 2001;1:4. doi: 10.1186/1471-2482-1-4. Epub 2001 Oct 31.
7

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