Suppr超能文献

蚌式切口与左前外侧开胸术。进行复苏性开胸术时哪种方式更快?重温龟兔赛跑的故事。

Clamshell incision versus left anterolateral thoracotomy. Which one is faster when performing a resuscitative thoracotomy? The tortoise and the hare revisited.

作者信息

Flaris Alexandros N, Simms Eric R, Prat Nicolas, Reynard Floran, Caillot Jean-Louis, Voiglio Eric J

机构信息

Faculté de Médecine Lyon Est, Université Lyon 1, UMR T9405, 69003, Lyon, France,

出版信息

World J Surg. 2015 May;39(5):1306-11. doi: 10.1007/s00268-014-2924-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The clamshell incision (CI) offers a better exposure than the left anterolateral thoracotomy (LAT) as a resuscitative thoracotomy. Most surgeons will have to manage a heart wound only once or twice in their career. The patient's survival depends on how fast the surgeon can control the heart wound; however, it is unclear which of the two incisions allows for faster control in the hands of inexperienced surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare the time needed to access and control a standardized stab wound to the right ventricle, by inexperienced surgical trainees, by LAT or CI; we hypothesized that the CI does not take longer than the LAT.

METHODS

Sixteen residents were shown a video on how to perform both procedures. They were randomly assigned to control a standardized stab wound of the right ventricle on perfused human cadavers by LAT (n = 8) or CI (n = 8). Access time (skin to maximal exposure), control time (maximal exposure until control of the heart wound) and total time (the sum of access and control times) were recorded.

RESULTS

Total time was 6.62 min [3.20-8.14] (median [interquartile range]) for LAT and 4.63 min [3.17-6.73] for CI (p = 0.46). Access time was 2.39 min [1.21-2.76] for LAT and 2.33 min [1.58-4.86] for CI (p = 0.34). Control time was 4.16 min [2.32-5.49] for LAT and 1.85 min [1.38-2.23] for CI (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

The time needed from skin incision until cardiac wound control via CI was not longer than via LAT and the easier control of the cardiac wound when using CI was confirmed.

摘要

背景

作为一种复苏性开胸手术,蚌式切口(CI)比左前外侧开胸术(LAT)能提供更好的暴露。大多数外科医生在其职业生涯中处理心脏伤口的次数可能只有一两次。患者的存活取决于外科医生控制心脏伤口的速度;然而,在经验不足的外科医生手中,这两种切口中哪种能更快控制尚不清楚。本研究的目的是比较经验不足的外科实习生通过LAT或CI进入并控制右心室标准刺伤所需的时间;我们假设CI所需时间不超过LAT。

方法

向16名住院医生展示了关于如何进行这两种手术的视频。他们被随机分配通过LAT(n = 8)或CI(n = 8)在灌注的人体尸体上控制右心室的标准刺伤。记录进入时间(皮肤切开至最大暴露)、控制时间(最大暴露至控制心脏伤口)和总时间(进入时间与控制时间之和)。

结果

LAT的总时间为6.62分钟[3.20 - 8.14](中位数[四分位间距]),CI为4.63分钟[3.17 - 6.73](p = 0.46)。LAT的进入时间为2.39分钟[1.21 - 2.76],CI为2.33分钟[1.58 - 4.86](p = 0.34)。LAT的控制时间为4.16分钟[2.32 - 5.49],CI为1.85分钟[1.38 - 2.23](p = 0.018)。

结论

从皮肤切开到通过CI控制心脏伤口所需的时间不超过通过LAT,并且证实了使用CI时更容易控制心脏伤口。

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