Teixeira João Araújo, Ribeiro Carlos, Moreira Luís M, de Sousa Fabiana, Pinho André, Graça Luís, Maia José Costa
Serviço de Cirurgia. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade do Porto/Hospital de S. JoÉo. Porto. Portugal.
Gabinete de Estudos Metodológicos e Tratamento de Dados. Escola Superior de Saúde de Vila Nova de Gaia. Instituto Piaget. Gaia. Portugal.
Acta Med Port. 2014 Nov-Dec;27(6):685-91. Epub 2014 Dec 30.
Despite the skepticism with which it was initially seen, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is now the technique of choice for acute cholecystitis. It is, however, important to evaluate the results in comparison with classic cholecystectomy, since the latter is still used by some surgeons in certain situations.
Our research corresponds to the analysis of 520 patients operated on for acute cholecystitis performed in the department of surgery at the SÉo JoÉo Hospital in Oporto - 412 (79.2%) laparoscopic cholecystectomies and 108 (20.8%) open cholecystectomies - from 2007 to 2013. We evaluated comorbidities, leukocytosis, time between diagnosis and surgery, ASA, per and postoperative complications, mortality, reoperations, lesion of main bile duct, conversion rate and hospital stay, in order to compare these two techniques. The conversion group was included in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Statistical analysis was based on descriptive statistic procedures and the evaluation of contrast between groups was based on Fishers' exact test. Significant values were considered for p < 0.05.
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy versus Open Cholecystectomy: Mortality: 0.7% vs 3,7% (p = 0.0369); Peroperative complications: 3.6% vs 12.9% (p = 0.0006); Surgical postoperative complications: 7.7% vs 17.5% (p = 0.0055); Medical postoperative complications: 4.3% vs 5.5% (p = 0.6077); Lesion of the main bile duct: 0.9% vs 1.8% (p = 0.6091); Reoperation: 2.9% vs 5.5% (p = 0.2315); Hospital stay up to 4 days after surgery: 64.8% vs 18.5% (p < 0.001). The convertion rate was of 10.7%: 8.8% in early surgery (before 4 days after de diagnosis) and 13.7% in the late surgery (after this time but in the same stay) (p = 0.1425). Multiple causes led to convertion: surgical complications (biliary lesions, iatrogenic lesion of the small bowel, perfurations of the gallbladder with spillage of stones); complications during the pneumoperitoneum, unclear anatomy and scoliosis. Postoperative complications in laparoscopic cholecystectomies converted group vs non-converted: surgical 20.4% vs 6.2% (p = 0.0034) and medical 6.8% vs 4.1% (p = 0.4484).
There are few investigations concerning the comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs acute cholecystitis in patients with acute cholecystitis, corresponding mostly to multicenter studies. For this reason, we carry out an analysis inherent to 520 patients operated on with that disease in the surgery department of Hospital S. JoÉo in Oporto of which 412 were by laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 108 by acute cholecystitis. We found better results in laparoscopic cholecystectomy than in acute cholecystitis with respect to mortality, per and post-operative surgical complications and hospital stay. The incidence of main bile duct injury, medicalcomplications and reoperations, although less evident in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, were not statistically significant. There were more complications in the group of laparoscopic cholecystectomy converted than in those where it was not be necessary the conversion. This raises the need, in complications during the laparoscopic cholecystectomy, not to perform the conversion too late. The analysis of this study, therefore, properly values laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the surgery of patients with acute cholecystitis.
The results justify the frequency with which laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed in acute cholecystitis, in comparison to open surgery, thus taking an increasingly prominent place in the treatment of this disease.
尽管腹腔镜胆囊切除术最初受到质疑,但如今它已成为急性胆囊炎的首选手术方式。然而,将其结果与传统胆囊切除术进行比较很重要,因为在某些情况下,一些外科医生仍会使用传统胆囊切除术。
我们的研究是对2007年至2013年期间在波尔图圣若昂医院外科接受急性胆囊炎手术的520例患者进行分析——412例(79.2%)腹腔镜胆囊切除术和108例(20.8%)开腹胆囊切除术。我们评估了合并症、白细胞增多症、诊断与手术之间的时间、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级、术中和术后并发症、死亡率、再次手术、主要胆管损伤、中转率和住院时间,以便比较这两种手术方式。中转组纳入腹腔镜胆囊切除术。统计分析基于描述性统计程序,组间对比评估基于Fisher精确检验。p < 0.05被视为具有显著意义。
腹腔镜胆囊切除术与开腹胆囊切除术对比:死亡率:0.7% 对3.7%(p = 0.0369);术中并发症:3.6% 对12.9%(p = 0.0006);术后手术并发症:7.7% 对17.5%(p = 0.0055);术后内科并发症:4.3% 对5.5%(p = 0.6077);主要胆管损伤:0.9% 对1.8%(p = 0.6091);再次手术:2.9% 对5.5%(p = 0.2315);术后4天内住院:64.8% 对18.5%(p < 0.001)。中转率为10.7%:早期手术(诊断后4天内)为8.8%,晚期手术(此后但在同一住院期间)为13.7%(p = 0.1425)。导致中转的原因有多种:手术并发症(胆管损伤、小肠医源性损伤、胆囊穿孔伴结石溢出);气腹期间的并发症、解剖结构不清和脊柱侧弯。腹腔镜胆囊切除术中转组与未中转组的术后并发症对比:手术并发症20.4% 对6.2%(p = 0.0034),内科并发症6.8% 对4.1%(p = 0.4484)。
关于急性胆囊炎患者腹腔镜胆囊切除术与开腹胆囊切除术比较的研究较少,大多为多中心研究。因此,我们对在波尔图圣若昂医院外科接受该疾病手术的520例患者进行了分析,其中412例行腹腔镜胆囊切除术,108例行开腹胆囊切除术。我们发现,在死亡率、术中和术后手术并发症及住院时间方面,腹腔镜胆囊切除术的结果优于开腹胆囊切除术。主要胆管损伤、内科并发症和再次手术的发生率,虽然在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中不太明显,但无统计学意义。腹腔镜胆囊切除术中转组的并发症多于无需中转的组。这就提出了在腹腔镜胆囊切除术出现并发症时,不要过晚进行中转的必要性。因此,本研究分析正确地评估了腹腔镜胆囊切除术在急性胆囊炎患者手术中的价值。
与开放手术相比,这些结果证明了腹腔镜胆囊切除术在急性胆囊炎治疗中应用的频率,使其在该疾病的治疗中占据越来越突出的地位。