Suppr超能文献

单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术——我们负担得起吗?不同手术技术的成本比较。

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy--can we afford that? Cost comparison of different surgical techniques.

作者信息

Matyja Maciej, Strzałka Marcin, Zychowicz Anna, Kołodziej Damian, Rembiasz Kazimierz, Budzyński Andrzej

出版信息

Pol Przegl Chir. 2014 Apr;86(4):177-80. doi: 10.2478/pjs-2014-0032.

Abstract

UNLABELLED

One of the most commonly performed surgeries in general surgery wards with laparoscopic technique as a method of choice is gall-bladder excision. In addition to -the commonly used conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is getting more and more attention. Despite many works and studies comparing these methods, there is still a shortage of results assessing efficiency of this new surgical technique. The aim of the study was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of this method in Polish financial reality. We have analyzed costs of three different surgical techniques: conventional (multi- incision) laparoscopic cholecystectomy, SILC and 'no-port' SILC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that compared three groups of patients who underwent treatment with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (n=20), SILC (n=20) and no-port SILC (n=20). These groups were matched by age, sex and BMI. Following parameters were analyzed: complication rate, operative time, operative costs, length of hospital stay, hospitalization costs. The SILC cases were performed with one of the three-trocar SILC ports available on the market. The 'no- port' SILC cases were performed by single skin incision in the umbilicus, insertion of one 10 mm trocar for the operating instrument, another instrument and scope were inserted directly thorough small incisions in the aponeurosis without a dedicated port

RESULTS

The average operative cost was significantly higher in the SILC group comparing to the conventional laparoscopy group and the no-port SILC group. There was no significant difference in complication rate, operative time, length of hospital stay, or hospitalization costs between the three groups

CONCLUSIONS

Currently the cost of the dedicated SILC port does not allow a regular use of this procedure in Polish financial reality. According to our experience improved cosmesis is the only advantage of the single incision laparoscopy, therefore we believe that it is reasonable to consider this technique in a a very selected group of patients.

摘要

未标注

在普通外科病房中,以腹腔镜技术作为首选方法进行的最常见手术之一是胆囊切除术。除了常用的传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术外,单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术越来越受到关注。尽管有许多比较这些方法的工作和研究,但仍缺乏评估这种新手术技术效率的结果。本研究的目的是评估该方法在波兰经济现实中的成本效益。我们分析了三种不同手术技术的成本:传统(多切口)腹腔镜胆囊切除术、单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)和“无端口”SILC。

材料与方法

我们进行了一项回顾性研究,比较了三组接受传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术(n = 20)、SILC(n = 20)和“无端口”SILC(n = 20)治疗的患者。这些组在年龄、性别和体重指数方面进行了匹配。分析了以下参数:并发症发生率、手术时间、手术成本、住院时间、住院费用。SILC病例使用市场上可用的三种三套管SILC端口之一进行。“无端口”SILC病例通过脐部单一皮肤切口进行,插入一个10毫米套管用于操作器械,另一个器械和内镜直接通过腱膜上的小切口插入,无需专用端口。

结果

与传统腹腔镜组和“无端口”SILC组相比,SILC组的平均手术成本显著更高。三组之间在并发症发生率、手术时间、住院时间或住院费用方面没有显著差异。

结论

目前,在波兰的经济现实中,专用SILC端口的成本不允许常规使用该手术。根据我们的经验,改善美容效果是单切口腹腔镜手术的唯一优势,因此我们认为在非常有限的患者群体中考虑这种技术是合理的。

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