Suppr超能文献

[单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗成人急性阑尾炎:一项随机对照试验的Meta分析]

[Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for adult acute appendicitis: a Meta-analysis for randomized controlled trials].

作者信息

Kuang Xuejun, Duan Shuangni, Wang Jianjun, Peng Zhao

机构信息

Department of Evidence-Based Medicine; Department of General and Abdominal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital, Xiangnan University, Chenzhou Hunan 423000, China

出版信息

Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2014 Dec;39(12):1299-305. doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2014.12.013.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficiency and safety for single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS

The literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning SILA versus CLA was retrieved by searching the electronic databases from the inception date to May 2014. Methodological quality of the included trials was assessed by using the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook criteria, and the data were extracted and subjected to Meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.1 analysis software.

RESULTS

A total of 1 183 patients were finally selected after the screening. Among them, 582 cases underwent SILA and 601 cases underwent CLA. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that SILA was associated with higher conversion rate (RR=4.38, 95% CI 1.96-9.79, Z=3.59, P=0.0003), longer operative time (RR=4.83, 95% CI 1.57-8.09, Z=2.90, P=0.004), shorter length of hospital stay (WMD=?0.11, 95%CI ?0.21-?0.01, Z=2.02, P=0.04), and better scores for the postoperative appearance of incision (WMD=0.94, 95%CI 0.49-1.40, Z=4.06, P< 0.001) compared with CLA; no significant difference was observed in postoperative complications and postoperative pain scores (RR=1.03, 95% CI 0.74-1.45, Z=0.18, P=0.86; WMD=?0.19, 95%CI ?0.59-0.20, Z=0.95, P=0.34) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

For patients under the conditions of the strict selection, SILA is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of adult acute appendicitis, especially apply to those who care about incision appearance.

摘要

目的

评估单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(SILA)与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术(CLA)的有效性及安全性。

方法

通过检索电子数据库,收集从建库至2014年5月有关SILA对比CLA的随机对照试验(RCT)文献。采用Cochrane评价员手册标准评估纳入试验的方法学质量,提取数据并运用RevMan 5.1分析软件进行Meta分析。

结果

筛选后最终纳入1183例患者,其中582例行SILA,601例行CLA。Meta分析结果显示,与CLA相比,SILA的中转率更高(RR = 4.38,95%CI 1.96 - 9.79,Z = 3.59,P = 0.0003)、手术时间更长(RR = 4.83,95%CI 1.57 - 8.09,Z = 2.90,P = 关于单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(SILA)与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术(CLA)有效性及安全性的Meta分析0.004)、住院时间更短(WMD = -0.11,95%CI -0.21 - -0.01,Z = 2.02,P = 0.04),术后切口外观评分更好(WMD = 0.94,95%CI 0.49 - 1.40,Z = 4.06,P < 0.001);两组术后并发症及术后疼痛评分差异无统计学意义(RR = 1.关于单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术(SILA)与传统腹腔镜阑尾切除术(CLA)有效性及安全性的Meta分析03,95%CI 0.74 - 1.45,Z = 0.18,P = 0.86;WMD = -0.19,95%CI -0.59 - 0.20,Z = 0.95,P = 0.34)。

结论

对于严格筛选条件下的患者,SILA是治疗成人急性阑尾炎的一种安全有效的术式,尤其适用于那些在意切口外观的患者。

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