Suppr超能文献

微创肾上腺切除术:经腹与经后腹腔入路的多中心比较

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy: a multicenter comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches.

作者信息

Ramacciato Giovanni, Nigri Giuseppe R, Petrucciani Niccolò, Di Santo Vincenzo, Piccoli Michaela, Buniva Paolo, Valabrega Stefano, D'Angelo Francesco, Aurello Paolo, Mercantini Paolo, Del Gaudio Massimo, Melotti Gianluigi

机构信息

Department of Surgery, St Andrea Hospital, II School of Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Am Surg. 2011 Apr;77(4):409-16.

Abstract

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy (MIA) is both feasible and safe with either transperitoneal or retroperitoneal entry. However, only a few studies have rigorously compared these two techniques. The aim of the current study is to compare transperitoneal and retroperitoneal adrenalectomy to detect significant differences in patient selection and perioperative outcomes. Between 1995 and 2009, 171 patients underwent MIA through transperitoneal (n = 127) or retroperitoneal access (n = 44). The respective cohorts were then examined retrospectively through matched and unmatched comparisons. Multivariate analyses of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay were performed. Surgical indications were benign lesions (70.2%), malignant tumors (11.1%), and pheochromocytomas (18.7%). The postoperative morbidity rate was 15.8 per cent, but mortality was null. The rate of conversion to open surgery was 5.3 per cent. Blood loss and operative time were significantly lower with the transperitoneal approach, whereas time to oral intake was shorter for the retroperitoneal group. Tumor size less than 4.5 cm was associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and lower postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic and retroperitoneal routes are both effective and safe for excising adrenal lesions. In the present study, however, laparoscopic adrenalectomy demonstrated shorter operative times with less blood loss. Regardless of this, we remain cautious in recommending one procedure preferentially. Other important measures of clinical outcome such as required pain control, ease of patient recovery, and cost considerations were not included in this analysis. Further randomized trials, with large patient numbers, are therefore desirable for defining an optimal surgical method.

摘要

微创肾上腺切除术(MIA)无论是经腹腔入路还是经腹膜后入路都是可行且安全的。然而,仅有少数研究对这两种技术进行了严格比较。本研究的目的是比较经腹腔和经腹膜后肾上腺切除术,以发现患者选择和围手术期结果方面的显著差异。1995年至2009年间,171例患者通过经腹腔入路(n = 127)或经腹膜后入路(n = 44)接受了MIA。然后通过匹配和非匹配比较对各个队列进行回顾性研究。对术中失血、术后发病率和住院时间进行了多因素分析。手术指征为良性病变(70.2%)、恶性肿瘤(11.1%)和嗜铬细胞瘤(18.7%)。术后发病率为15.8%,但死亡率为零。转为开放手术的比例为5.3%。经腹腔入路的失血量和手术时间显著更低,而经腹膜后组的经口进食时间更短。肿瘤大小小于4.5 cm与失血量更少、住院时间更短和术后发病率更低相关。腹腔镜和腹膜后入路切除肾上腺病变均有效且安全。然而,在本研究中,腹腔镜肾上腺切除术显示手术时间更短且失血量更少。尽管如此,我们在优先推荐一种手术方式时仍持谨慎态度。本分析未包括其他重要的临床结局指标,如所需的疼痛控制、患者恢复的难易程度和成本考量。因此,需要进行更多纳入大量患者的随机试验来确定最佳手术方法。

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