Suppr超能文献

建立气腹:Verres针还是哈森套管针?争论仍在继续。

Establishing pneumoperitoneum: Verres or Hasson? The debate continues.

作者信息

Dunne N, Booth M I, Dehn T C B

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading, UK.

出版信息

Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011 Jan;93(1):22-4. doi: 10.1308/003588411X12851639107557. Epub 2010 Nov 4.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The technique of establishing pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery remains contentious, with various different techniques available and each having its own advocates. The Verres needle approach has attracted much criticism and is seen to entail more risk, but is this view justified in the era of evidence-based medicine?

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Over a 6-year period, a prospective study was undertaken of 3126 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery performed by two upper gastrointestinal surgeons. One surgeon preferred the Verres needle and the other an open technique. A database was created of all cases and complication rates of the different techniques ascertained.

RESULTS

Peri-umbilical Verres needle was used in 1887 cases (60.4%) with two complications encountered, both of which were colonic injuries, with an incidence of 0.1%. Open port insertion was used in 1200 cases (38.4%) with one complication, a small bowel perforation, to give an incidence of 0.08%. The Verres needle was used in alternative positions in 22 cases (0.75%) and, when used in the left upper quadrant (19 cases), there was one complication, a left hepatic lobe puncture, with an incidence of 5.26%. Our overall incidence of intra-abdominal injury was 0.13%, all in patients who had undergone previous abdominal surgery, and in the subgroup of patients with previous surgery the rate was 0.78%. There was no mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice varies as to the method chosen to induce pneumoperitoneum, but our results show there is no significant difference between the technique chosen and incidence of complications, and this is supported in the literature.

摘要

引言

腹腔镜手术建立气腹的技术仍存在争议,有多种不同技术可供选择,且每种技术都有其支持者。Verres针穿刺法受到了诸多批评,被认为风险更高,但在循证医学时代,这种观点是否合理呢?

患者与方法

在6年期间,对3126例行腹腔镜手术的患者进行了一项前瞻性研究,手术由两位上消化道外科医生实施。其中一位医生更倾向于使用Verres针,另一位则偏好开放技术。创建了一个包含所有病例及不同技术并发症发生率的数据库。

结果

1887例(60.4%)使用脐周Verres针穿刺,出现2例并发症,均为结肠损伤,发生率为0.1%。1200例(38.4%)采用开放端口插入法,出现1例并发症,为小肠穿孔,发生率为0.08%。22例(0.75%)在其他位置使用Verres针,其中在左上腹使用时(19例)出现1例并发症,为左肝叶穿刺,发生率为5.26%。我们腹腔内损伤的总体发生率为0.13%,所有发生损伤的患者均曾接受过腹部手术,在曾接受过手术的患者亚组中,发生率为0.78%。无死亡病例。

结论

在诱导气腹的方法选择上存在差异,但我们的结果表明,所选技术与并发症发生率之间无显著差异,这在文献中也得到了支持。

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