Suppr超能文献

单切口小儿内镜手术(SIPES)与传统腹腔镜幽门肌切开术比较:单外科医生经验。

Single-incision pediatric Endosurgical (SIPES) versus conventional laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: a single-surgeon experience.

机构信息

Division of Pediatric Surgery, Children's Hospital of Alabama, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1600 7th Avenue South, ACC 300, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA.

出版信息

J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 Jun;14(6):965-8. doi: 10.1007/s11605-010-1199-6. Epub 2010 Apr 20.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pyloromyotomy by single-incision pediatric endosurgery (SIPES) is a new technique that leaves virtually no appreciable scar. So far, it has not been compared to conventional laparoscopic (CL) pyloromyotomy. This study compares the results of the first 15 SIPES pyloromyotomies of a surgeon to his last 15 CL cases.

METHODS

Data were collected on all SIPES pyloromyotomies. Age, gender, operative time, estimated blood loss, conversion/complication rate, and outcome in the SIPES patients were compared to the CL cohort.

RESULTS

There was no difference in age, weight, gender, blood loss, or hospital stay. A trend toward shorter operating time was found in the CL group (21.7 +/- 9.9 versus 30.3 +/- 15.8, p = 0.08, 95%CI 20.9-39.7 min). Two mucosal perforations occurred in the SIPES cohort. Both cases were converted to conventional laparoscopy, the defect was repaired, and both patients had an uncomplicated postoperative course. There were no wound infections or conversions to open surgery. Parents were uniformly pleased with the cosmetic results of SIPES.

CONCLUSION

SIPES pyloromyotomy may have a higher perforation rate than the CL approach. If recognized, a laparoscopic repair is feasible. Improved cosmesis must be carefully weighed against the potentially increased risks of SIPES versus conventional laparoscopic pyloromyotomy.

摘要

背景

经单切口小儿内镜外科行幽门肌切开术(SIPES)是一种新的技术,几乎不会留下明显的疤痕。到目前为止,它尚未与传统腹腔镜(CL)幽门肌切开术进行比较。本研究比较了一位外科医生实施的前 15 例 SIPES 幽门肌切开术与最后 15 例 CL 病例的结果。

方法

收集了所有 SIPES 幽门肌切开术的数据。将 SIPES 患者的年龄、性别、手术时间、估计失血量、转化率/并发症发生率和结果与 CL 队列进行比较。

结果

两组患者的年龄、体重、性别、出血量或住院时间均无差异。CL 组的手术时间有缩短的趋势(21.7 +/- 9.9 与 30.3 +/- 15.8,p = 0.08,95%CI 20.9-39.7 分钟)。SIPES 组发生了 2 例黏膜穿孔。这两种情况均转为传统腹腔镜,修复了缺陷,且这两例患者的术后过程均无并发症。无伤口感染或转为开放性手术。家长对 SIPES 的美容效果均表示满意。

结论

SIPES 幽门肌切开术的穿孔率可能高于 CL 方法。如果发现穿孔,腹腔镜修复是可行的。与传统腹腔镜幽门肌切开术相比,SIPES 改善的美容效果必须仔细权衡潜在的风险增加。

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