Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜急症手术治疗经药物治疗无效的憩室疾病:一种有价值的选择吗?一项回顾性对比队列研究的结果。

Laparoscopic emergency surgery for diverticular disease that failed medical treatment: a valuable option? Results of a retrospective comparative cohort study.

机构信息

1Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada 2Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada 3Department of Surgery, CHU de Québec - Hôpital Saint-François d'Assise, Québec Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery (QCMIS), Québec City, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 Dec;56(12):1395-402. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a760b6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has become the standard of treatment for elective management of diverticular disease. However, its use in the acute setting remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with open surgery in the acute management of complicated diverticular disease that failed initial medical treatment.

SETTINGS

This is a single-center comparative retrospective cohort study.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing surgery for complicated diverticular disease after an attempt at medical treatment from 2000 to 2011 were selected.

INTERVENTION

Laparoscopic versus open surgery was compared.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were overall 30-day morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, time to resume diet, and need for a permanent stoma.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were identified by using medical records: 24 laparoscopic surgery and 18 open surgery. Baseline demographics, ASA classification, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scores, Hinchey classification, and Charlson Comorbidity Index did not differ between groups. The mean operative time was 36 minutes longer (p = 0.05) and blood loss was 460 mL less (p < 0.001) for laparoscopic surgery. Two patients (8.3%) in the laparoscopic surgery group required conversion to open surgery. There was no mortality. Overall morbidity was lower favoring laparoscopic surgery (16.7% vs 55.6%; p = 0.01). Two patients in the laparoscopic surgery group experienced an anastomotic leak compared with none in the open surgery group. Mean time to resume diet (3 vs 6.5 days; p < 0.01) and length of stay (5 vs 8 days; p = 0.04) were shorter for the laparoscopic surgery group. Rate of permanent stoma at last follow-up (median, 332 days) did not differ significantly between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery for patients in whom medical treatment for complicated diverticular disease failed is associated with favorable outcomes, including a reduced rate of morbidity and a shorter length of stay. When applied to selected patients, this approach appears to be a safe procedure with a low rate of conversion.

摘要

背景

腹腔镜手术已成为择期治疗憩室疾病的标准治疗方法。然而,其在急性治疗中的应用仍存在争议。

目的

本研究旨在比较腹腔镜手术与开腹手术治疗初始药物治疗失败的复杂憩室疾病的疗效。

设置

这是一项单中心回顾性队列研究。

患者

选择 2000 年至 2011 年期间因药物治疗尝试后接受手术治疗的复杂憩室疾病患者。

干预

比较腹腔镜与开腹手术。

主要观察指标

主要观察指标为 30 天总发病率和死亡率。次要观察指标为住院时间、恢复饮食时间和永久性造口需要。

结果

通过病历共确定了 42 名患者:腹腔镜手术 24 例,开腹手术 18 例。两组患者的基线人口统计学、ASA 分级、急性生理学和慢性健康评估评分、Hinchey 分级和 Charlson 合并症指数无差异。腹腔镜手术组的平均手术时间长 36 分钟(p = 0.05),失血量少 460ml(p < 0.001)。腹腔镜手术组有 2 例(8.3%)患者需要转为开腹手术。无死亡病例。腹腔镜手术组的总发病率较低(16.7%比 55.6%;p = 0.01)。腹腔镜手术组有 2 例患者发生吻合口漏,开腹手术组无患者发生吻合口漏。腹腔镜手术组恢复饮食时间(3 天比 6.5 天;p < 0.01)和住院时间(5 天比 8 天;p = 0.04)较短。最后随访时永久性造口的比例(中位数,332 天)在两组间无显著差异。

局限性

本研究存在选择偏倚。

结论

与开腹手术相比,对于初始药物治疗失败的复杂憩室疾病患者,腹腔镜手术的疗效更好,包括发病率降低和住院时间缩短。当应用于选定的患者时,这种方法似乎是一种安全的手术,转化率低。

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