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