• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的对比研究

Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

作者信息

Kang Jungwoo, Bae Byung Noe, Gwak Geumhee, Park Inseok, Cho Hyunjin, Yang Keunho, Kim Ki Whan, Han Sehwan, Kim Hong-Joo, Kim Young-Duck

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Inje University Seoul Paik Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012 Dec;28(6):304-8. doi: 10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304. Epub 2012 Dec 31.

DOI:10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304
PMID:23346509
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3548145/
Abstract

PURPOSE

For the treatment of acute appendicitis, a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been widely performed. Recently, the use of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is increasing because it is believed to have advantages over conventional laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we compared SILS and a conventional LA.

METHODS

We analyzed the 217 patients who received laparoscopy-assisted appendectomies between August 2010 and April 2012 at Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital. One hundred-twelve patients underwent SILS, and 105 patients underwent LA. For the two groups, we compared the operation times, postoperative laboratory results, postoperative pain, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The patients' demographics, including body mass index, were not significantly different between the two groups. There were 6 perforated appendicitis cases in the SILS group and 5 cases in the LA group. The mean operative time in the SILS group was 65.88 ± 22.74 minutes whereas that in the LA group was 61.70 ± 22.27 minutes (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in the mean hospital stays, use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and wound infections between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative pain, complications and hospital stay showed no statistically significant differences between the SILS and the LA groups. However, our SILS method uses a single trocar and two latex tubes, so cost savings and reduced interference during surgery are expected.

摘要

目的

对于急性阑尾炎的治疗,传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)已被广泛应用。近来,单切口腹腔镜手术(SILS)的使用日益增加,因为人们认为它比传统腹腔镜手术具有优势。在本研究中,我们比较了SILS和传统LA。

方法

我们分析了2010年8月至2012年4月在仁济大学桑格耶白医院接受腹腔镜辅助阑尾切除术的217例患者。112例患者接受了SILS,105例患者接受了LA。对于这两组,我们比较了手术时间、术后实验室检查结果、术后疼痛、住院时间和术后并发症。

结果

两组患者的人口统计学数据,包括体重指数,无显著差异。SILS组有6例穿孔性阑尾炎病例,LA组有5例。SILS组的平均手术时间为65.88±22.74分钟,而LA组为61.70±22.27分钟(P = 0.276)。两组之间的平均住院时间、非甾体类抗炎药的使用和伤口感染情况无显著差异。

结论

SILS组和LA组在术后疼痛、并发症和住院时间方面无统计学显著差异。然而,我们的SILS方法使用单个套管针和两根乳胶管,因此预计可节省成本并减少手术期间的干扰。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/88c8bd012562/jksc-28-304-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/6661da212d97/jksc-28-304-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/603c9036fac0/jksc-28-304-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/88c8bd012562/jksc-28-304-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/6661da212d97/jksc-28-304-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/603c9036fac0/jksc-28-304-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9254/3548145/88c8bd012562/jksc-28-304-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的对比研究
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012 Dec;28(6):304-8. doi: 10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
2
Prospective, randomized comparative study between single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术的前瞻性随机对照研究
Cir Esp. 2014 Aug-Sep;92(7):472-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2013.12.013. Epub 2014 Feb 26.
3
Application of single incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies in patients with complicated appendicitis.单切口腹腔镜手术在复杂性阑尾炎患者阑尾切除术中的应用。
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2010 Dec;26(6):388-94. doi: 10.3393/jksc.2010.26.6.388. Epub 2010 Dec 31.
4
A prospective, randomized controlled trial of single-incision laparoscopic vs conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for treatment of acute appendicitis.前瞻性、随机对照试验比较单切口腹腔镜与传统三孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的效果。
J Am Coll Surg. 2014 May;218(5):950-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.12.052. Epub 2014 Feb 19.
5
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: an analysis of outcomes at a single institution.单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术与传统三孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术:单机构的结局分析
Surg Endosc. 2014 Feb;28(2):626-30. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3219-6. Epub 2013 Oct 4.
6
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery: feasibility for pediatric appendectomies.单切口腹腔镜手术:小儿阑尾切除术的可行性。
J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Jun;45(6):1208-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.02.088.
7
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: an early experience.单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术:早期经验
Am Surg. 2011 Mar;77(3):286-9. doi: 10.1177/000313481107700315.
8
Teaching single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy in pediatric patients.在儿科患者中教授单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术。
JSLS. 2012 Oct-Dec;16(4):619-22. doi: 10.4293/108680812X13462882737339.
9
Safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies: a meta-analysis.单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术的安全性和有效性:一项荟萃分析。
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jul 7;19(25):4072-82. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i25.4072.
10
Pain after laparoscopic appendectomy: a comparison of transumbilical single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgery.腹腔镜阑尾切除术后疼痛:经脐单孔手术与传统腹腔镜手术的比较
J Korean Surg Soc. 2012 Mar;82(3):172-8. doi: 10.4174/jkss.2012.82.3.172. Epub 2012 Feb 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Is Transumbilical Laparoscopic-assisted Appendectomy Better than Laparoscopic Appendectomy in Children? A Randomized Controlled Study.经脐腹腔镜辅助阑尾切除术在儿童中是否优于腹腔镜阑尾切除术?一项随机对照研究。
J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2025 May-Jun;30(3):369-376. doi: 10.4103/jiaps.jiaps_264_24. Epub 2025 Apr 14.
2
European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery.欧洲内镜外科学会(EAES)关于单切口内镜手术的共识声明。
Surg Endosc. 2019 Apr;33(4):996-1019. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06693-2. Epub 2019 Feb 15.
3
Two-port laparoscopic appendectomy with the help of a needle grasper: better cosmetic results and fewer trocars than conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.

本文引用的文献

1
Pain after laparoscopic appendectomy: a comparison of transumbilical single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgery.腹腔镜阑尾切除术后疼痛:经脐单孔手术与传统腹腔镜手术的比较
J Korean Surg Soc. 2012 Mar;82(3):172-8. doi: 10.4174/jkss.2012.82.3.172. Epub 2012 Feb 27.
2
Application of single incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomy in children.单切口腹腔镜手术在儿童阑尾切除术中的应用
J Korean Surg Soc. 2012 Feb;82(2):110-5. doi: 10.4174/jkss.2012.82.2.110. Epub 2012 Jan 27.
3
Single-incision versus conventional three-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a single centre experience.
借助持针器的两孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术:与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术相比,美容效果更佳且穿刺孔更少。
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2016;11(2):105-10. doi: 10.5114/wiitm.2016.60504. Epub 2016 Jun 13.
4
Gasless transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy as a safe and cost-effective alternative surgical procedure for mild acute appendicitis.无气腹经脐腹腔镜辅助阑尾切除术作为轻度急性阑尾炎的一种安全且具有成本效益的替代手术方法。
Surg Today. 2016 Mar;46(3):319-25. doi: 10.1007/s00595-015-1177-4. Epub 2015 Apr 28.
5
Incidence of minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery at National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers.美国国立综合癌症网络中心的微创结直肠癌手术发生率。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Dec 19;107(1):362. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju362. Print 2015 Jan.
6
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing single incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.比较单切口与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术的随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
World J Surg. 2014 Aug;38(8):1937-46. doi: 10.1007/s00268-014-2535-x.
7
Overview of single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancers: past, present, and the future.结直肠癌单孔腹腔镜手术概述:过去、现在与未来
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan 28;20(4):997-1004. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i4.997.
8
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy.单切口腹腔镜阑尾切除术
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012 Dec;28(6):282-3. doi: 10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.282. Epub 2012 Dec 31.
单切口与传统三切口腹腔镜阑尾切除术:单中心经验。
Surg Today. 2012 Jun;42(6):542-6. doi: 10.1007/s00595-011-0110-8. Epub 2012 Jan 5.
4
Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy: comparison with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术:与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术的比较
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012 Mar;22(2):142-5. doi: 10.1089/lap.2011.0253. Epub 2011 Dec 6.
5
Comparison of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for acute nonperforated and perforated appendicitis in the obese population.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗肥胖人群急性非穿孔与穿孔阑尾炎的比较。
Am J Surg. 2011 Dec;202(6):733-8; discussion 738-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.06.034. Epub 2011 Oct 11.
6
Single-incision multiport laparoscopy does not cause more pain than conventional laparoscopy: a prospective evaluation in children undergoing appendectomy.单切口多通道腹腔镜手术并不比传统腹腔镜手术引起更多疼痛:对行阑尾切除术儿童的前瞻性评估。
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2011 Oct;21(8):753-6. doi: 10.1089/lap.2011.0131. Epub 2011 Jul 21.
7
A case-controlled comparison of single-site access versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.单部位入路与传统三孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术的病例对照比较。
Surg Endosc. 2011 May;25(5):1415-9. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1406-2. Epub 2010 Oct 23.
8
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis.腹腔镜与开腹阑尾切除术治疗穿孔性阑尾炎
J Gastrointest Surg. 2006 Jun;10(6):906-10. doi: 10.1016/j.gassur.2005.12.012.
9
Laparoscopic vs conventional appendectomy--a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.腹腔镜与传统阑尾切除术——随机对照试验的荟萃分析
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1998 Aug;383(3-4):289-95. doi: 10.1007/s004230050135.
10
["Open" versus laparoscopic appendectomy].["开放式"与腹腔镜阑尾切除术]
Chirurg. 1996 May;67(5):522-5; discussion 522.