Mungo Benedetto, Molena Daniela, Stem Miloslawa, Feinberg Richard L, Lidor Anne O
Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
J Am Coll Surg. 2014 Aug;219(2):229-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.02.030. Epub 2014 Apr 13.
Although surgical repair is universally recognized as the gold standard for treatment of paraesophageal hernia (PEH), the optimal surgical approach is still the subject of debate. To determine which surgical technique is safest, we compared the outcomes of laparoscopic (lap), open transabdominal (TA), and open transthoracic (TT) PEH repair using the NSQIP database.
From 2005 to 2011, we identified 8,186 patients who underwent a PEH repair (78.4% lap, 19.2% TA, 2.4% TT). Primary outcome measured was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, and NSQIP-measured postoperative complications. Multivariable analyses were performed to compare the odds of each outcome across procedure type (lap, TA, and TT) while adjusting for other factors.
Transabdominal patients had the highest 30-day mortality rate (2.6%), compared with 0.5% in the lap patients (p < 0.001) and 1.5% in TT patients. Mean length of stay was statistically significantly longer for TA and TT patients (7.8 days and 6.5 days, respectively) compared with lap patients (3.3 days). After adjusting for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, emergency cases, functional status, and steroid use, TA patients were nearly 3 times as likely as lap patients to experience 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.97; 95% CI, 1.69 to 5.20; p < 0.001). Moreover, TA and TT patients had significantly increased odds of overall (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.79 to 2.51; p < 0.001; OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.88 to 3.96; p < 0.001; respectively) and serious morbidity (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.53 to 2.37, p < 0.001; OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.54 to 4.00; p < 0.001; respectively).
In the absence of published data indicating improved long-term outcomes after open TA or TT approach, our findings support the use of laparoscopy, whenever technically feasible, because it yields improved short-term outcomes.
尽管手术修复被公认为治疗食管旁疝(PEH)的金标准,但最佳手术方式仍存在争议。为确定哪种手术技术最安全,我们使用国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)数据库比较了腹腔镜(lap)、经腹开放(TA)和经胸开放(TT)修复PEH的效果。
2005年至2011年,我们确定了8186例行PEH修复术的患者(78.4%为lap,19.2%为TA,2.4%为TT)。主要观察指标为30天死亡率。次要观察指标包括住院时间和NSQIP测量的术后并发症。进行多变量分析以比较不同手术方式(lap、TA和TT)在调整其他因素后的各观察指标发生几率。
经腹手术患者的30天死亡率最高(2.6%),而lap手术患者为0.5%(p<0.001),TT手术患者为1.5%。与lap手术患者(3.3天)相比,TA和TT手术患者的平均住院时间在统计学上显著更长(分别为7.8天和6.5天)。在调整年龄、美国麻醉医师协会评分、急诊病例、功能状态和类固醇使用情况后,TA手术患者发生30天死亡的几率几乎是lap手术患者的3倍(比值比[OR]为2.97;95%可信区间[CI]为1.69至5.20;p<0.001)。此外,TA和TT手术患者发生总体并发症(OR分别为2.12;95%CI为1.79至2.51;p<0.001;OR为2.73;95%CI为1.88至3.96;p<0.001)和严重并发症(OR分别为1.90;95%CI为1.53至2.37,p<0.001;OR为2.49;95%CI为1.54至4.00;p<0.001)的几率显著增加。
在缺乏已发表数据表明经腹开放或经胸开放手术具有改善的长期预后的情况下,我们的研究结果支持在技术可行时使用腹腔镜手术,因为其短期预后更佳。