Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜与开腹结直肠切除术治疗美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级 3 和 4 患者:微创方法与更快的恢复和降低成本相关。

Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classifications 3 and 4: the minimally invasive approach is associated with significantly quicker recovery and reduced costs.

机构信息

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2010 Jun;24(6):1280-6. doi: 10.1007/s00464-009-0761-3. Epub 2009 Dec 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Conceivably, the benefits of earlier recovery associated with a minimally invasive technique used in laparoscopic colectomy (LC) may be amplified for patients with comorbid disease. The dearth of evidence supporting the safety of laparoscopy for these patients led to a comparison of outcomes between LC and open colectomy (OC) for patients with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classifications 3 and 4.

METHODS

Data for all ASA 3 and 4 patients who underwent elective LC were reviewed from a prospectively maintained laparoscopic database. The patients who underwent LC were matched with OC patients by age, gender, diagnosis, year, and type of surgery. Estimated blood loss, operation time, time to return of bowel function, length of hospital stay, readmission rate, and 30-day complication and mortality rates were compared using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Wilcoxon tests as appropriate. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

In this study, 231 LCs were matched with 231 OCs. The median age of the patients was 68 years, and 234 (51%) of the patients were male. There were 44 (19%) conversions from LC to OC. More patients in the OC group had undergone previous major laparotomy (5 vs. 15%; p < 0.001). Estimated blood loss, return of bowel function, length of hospital stay, and total direct costs were decreased in the LC group. Wound infection was significantly greater with OC (p = 0.02). When patients with previous major laparotomy were excluded, the two groups had similar overall morbidity. The other benefits of LC, however, persisted.

CONCLUSION

The findings show that LC is a safe option for patients with a high ASA classification. The LC approach is associated with faster postoperative recovery, lower morbidity rates, and lower hospital costs than the OC approach.

摘要

背景

可以想象,与腹腔镜结直肠切除术 (LC) 中使用的微创技术相关的更早恢复的益处可能会放大患有合并症的患者的益处。由于缺乏支持这些患者腹腔镜安全性的证据,因此对 ASA 分级 3 和 4 的患者进行了 LC 与开腹结直肠切除术 (OC) 之间的结局比较。

方法

回顾了前瞻性维持的腹腔镜数据库中所有 ASA 3 和 4 级接受择期 LC 的患者的数据。LC 患者与 OC 患者按年龄、性别、诊断、年份和手术类型进行匹配。使用卡方检验、Fisher 确切检验和 Wilcoxon 检验比较估计出血量、手术时间、恢复肠道功能时间、住院时间、再入院率以及 30 天并发症和死亡率。p 值 <0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。

结果

在这项研究中,231 例 LC 与 231 例 OC 相匹配。患者的中位年龄为 68 岁,234 例(51%)为男性。有 44 例(19%)从 LC 转为 OC。OC 组中更多的患者曾接受过重大剖腹手术(5%比 15%;p <0.001)。LC 组的估计出血量、恢复肠道功能时间、住院时间和总直接费用减少。OC 组的伤口感染明显更多(p = 0.02)。当排除既往重大剖腹手术的患者后,两组的总发病率相似。然而,LC 的其他益处仍然存在。

结论

这些发现表明 LC 是高 ASA 分级患者的安全选择。LC 方法与 OC 方法相比,术后恢复更快,发病率更低,住院费用更低。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验