• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

经脐单切口腹腔镜精索静脉结扎术与传统腹腔镜技术的随机对照临床研究。

Single incision transumbilical laparoscopic varicocelectomy versus the conventional laparoscopic technique: A randomized clinical study.

机构信息

Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.

Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2015 Jun;18:178-83. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.04.048. Epub 2015 May 1.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.04.048
PMID:25937155
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Varicocele is the most common correctable cause of infertility. We analyzed the outcomes of single incision laparoscopic varicocelectomy (SIL-V) in comparison with conventional transperitoneal varicocelectomy (CTL-V).

METHODS

Patients with clinically palpable varicocele treated by laparoscopic varicocelectomy were randomly allocated into two groups: SIL-V and CTL-V group. The primary outcome measures were improvement in semen parameters and resolution of testicular pain. Secondary outcome measures included operating time, postoperative pain scores, time to return to normal activity, patient satisfaction and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Eighty patients completed the study. No vascular or intestinal complications occurred during both procedures. All patients were discharged 24 h postoperatively. The parameters measuring the success of varicocelectomy had improved for the majority of patients with no significant difference between the two groups. There was significantly longer operating time in SIL-V group (44.6 ± 5.4 min) than in CTL-V group (41.3 ± 8.5 min) (P = 0.03). The difference in operating time was lost when bilateral procedures were compared (P = 0.21). The mean VAS scores for pain at 3, 24 and 48 h postoperatively were significantly lower in SIL-V group (P = 0.02, P = 0.03 and P < 0.001 respectively). Time to return to normal activity was significantly shorter in SIL-V (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in SIL-V group (P < 0.01). Postoperative complications were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSION

SIL-V is a safe and effective straightforward alternative to the well-established and accepted CTL-V. The tendency toward decreased postoperative pain, rapid return to normal activity and the high patients' satisfaction rate regarding cosmetic results are potential benefits of SIL-V procedure.

CLINICAL TRIAL

(NCT02335385).

摘要

背景

精索静脉曲张是最常见的可纠正的不育原因。我们分析了单切口腹腔镜精索静脉结扎术(SIL-V)与传统经腹腔精索静脉结扎术(CTL-V)的结果。

方法

对接受腹腔镜精索静脉结扎术治疗的临床可触及精索静脉曲张患者进行随机分组,分为 SIL-V 组和 CTL-V 组。主要观察指标是精液参数的改善和睾丸疼痛的缓解。次要观察指标包括手术时间、术后疼痛评分、恢复正常活动的时间、患者满意度和术后并发症。

结果

80 例患者完成了研究。两种手术均未发生血管或肠道并发症。所有患者均在术后 24 小时出院。大多数患者的精索静脉结扎术成功指标均有所改善,两组之间无显著差异。SIL-V 组的手术时间明显长于 CTL-V 组(44.6 ± 5.4 分钟比 41.3 ± 8.5 分钟)(P = 0.03)。当比较双侧手术时,手术时间的差异消失(P = 0.21)。SIL-V 组术后 3、24 和 48 小时的平均 VAS 疼痛评分明显较低(P = 0.02、P = 0.03 和 P < 0.001)。SIL-V 组恢复正常活动的时间明显缩短(P < 0.001)。SIL-V 组患者满意度明显较高(P < 0.01)。两组术后并发症相当。

结论

SIL-V 是一种安全有效的替代方法,与成熟且公认的 CTL-V 相比具有潜在优势。SIL-V 术后疼痛减轻、快速恢复正常活动和患者对美容效果的高满意度是潜在的获益。

临床试验

(NCT02335385)。

相似文献

1
Single incision transumbilical laparoscopic varicocelectomy versus the conventional laparoscopic technique: A randomized clinical study.经脐单切口腹腔镜精索静脉结扎术与传统腹腔镜技术的随机对照临床研究。
Int J Surg. 2015 Jun;18:178-83. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.04.048. Epub 2015 May 1.
2
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic treatment of varicocele in adolescents: Comparison between two techniques.单切口腹腔镜手术与传统腹腔镜治疗青少年精索静脉曲张:两种技术的比较
Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2014 Jul-Sep;11(3):201-5. doi: 10.4103/0189-6725.137325.
3
Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery with a single channel versus conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation: a prospective randomized study.单通道经脐单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜精索静脉结扎术治疗精索静脉曲张的前瞻性随机对照研究。
J Endourol. 2014 Feb;28(2):159-64. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0237. Epub 2013 Oct 17.
4
Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation in men with palpable varicocele: a randomized, clinical study.腹腔镜单部位手术与传统腹腔镜精索静脉曲张结扎术治疗可触及精索静脉曲张男性患者的随机对照临床研究。
Surg Endosc. 2012 Apr;26(4):1056-62. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1997-2. Epub 2011 Nov 15.
5
Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery varicocelectomy versus conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation: A meta-analysis.腹腔镜单孔手术精索静脉曲张切除术与传统腹腔镜精索静脉结扎术的Meta分析
J Int Med Res. 2016 Oct;44(5):985-993. doi: 10.1177/0300060516659824. Epub 2016 Sep 29.
6
Laparoscopic varicocelectomy in infertile men: does age matter?不育男性的腹腔镜下精索静脉曲张切除术:年龄有影响吗?
Urol Int. 2013;91(2):192-6. doi: 10.1159/000350860. Epub 2013 Jul 6.
7
[Transumbilical single-site single-port versus single-site double-port laparoscopic varicocelectomy for varicocele in adolescents].经脐单部位单孔与单部位双孔腹腔镜精索静脉高位结扎术治疗青少年精索静脉曲张的对比研究
Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2014 Apr;20(4):342-6.
8
Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) varicocelectomy with reusable components: comparison with the conventional laparoscopic technique.腹腔镜下单部位(LESS)精索静脉结扎术与可重复使用部件的比较:与传统腹腔镜技术的比较。
Surg Endosc. 2013 Oct;27(10):3646-52. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-2938-z. Epub 2013 Apr 3.
9
Comparison of surgical effect and postoperative patient experience between laparoendoscopic single-site and conventional laparoscopic varicocelectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.腹腔镜单孔与传统腹腔镜精索静脉曲张切除术的手术效果及术后患者体验比较:一项系统评价与Meta分析
Asian J Androl. 2017 Mar-Apr;19(2):248-255. doi: 10.4103/1008-682X.181194.
10
Prospective randomized comparison of transumbilical two-port laparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation.经脐单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜精索静脉曲张结扎术的前瞻性随机对照研究
Asian J Androl. 2017 Jan-Feb;19(1):34-38. doi: 10.4103/1008-682X.169994.

引用本文的文献

1
Midline incisional hernia guidelines: the European Hernia Society.中线切口疝指南:欧洲疝学会
Br J Surg. 2023 Nov 9;110(12):1732-1768. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znad284.
2
Does Varicocele Repair Improve Conventional Semen Parameters? A Meta-Analytic Study of Before-After Data.精索静脉曲张修复术能否改善传统精液参数?一项前后数据的荟萃分析研究。
World J Mens Health. 2024 Jan;42(1):92-132. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.230034. Epub 2023 Jun 22.
3
Prospective Comparison of Local Anesthesia with General or Spinal Anesthesia in Patients Treated with Microscopic Varicocelectomy.
显微镜下精索静脉曲张切除术患者局部麻醉与全身麻醉或脊髓麻醉的前瞻性比较。
J Clin Med. 2022 Oct 28;11(21):6397. doi: 10.3390/jcm11216397.
4
Outcome reporting across randomized controlled trials evaluating potential treatments for male infertility: a systematic review.评估男性不育症潜在治疗方法的随机对照试验中的结果报告:一项系统综述。
Hum Reprod Open. 2022 Mar 4;2022(2):hoac010. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoac010. eCollection 2022.
5
Surgical or radiological treatment for varicoceles in subfertile men.对不育男性精索静脉曲张的手术或放射治疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 23;4(4):CD000479. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000479.pub6.
6
Outcome of Gynecologic Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery with a Homemade Device and Conventional Laparoscopic Instruments in a Chinese Teaching Hospital.中国教学医院应用自制器械和传统腹腔镜器械行妇科单孔腹腔镜手术的效果。
Biomed Res Int. 2020 Jan 20;2020:5373927. doi: 10.1155/2020/5373927. eCollection 2020.
7
Laparoscopic entry techniques.腹腔镜进入技术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jan 18;1(1):CD006583. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006583.pub5.
8
Incidence of incisional hernias following single-incision versus traditional laparoscopic surgery: a meta-analysis.单切口与传统腹腔镜手术后切口疝发生率的比较:一项荟萃分析。
Hernia. 2019 Feb;23(1):91-100. doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1853-6. Epub 2018 Nov 23.
9
Modified Inguinal Microscope-Assisted Varicocelectomy under Local Anesthesia: A Non-randomised Controlled Study of 3565 Cases.改良腹股沟显微镜辅助精索静脉结扎术在局部麻醉下的应用:3565 例非随机对照研究。
Sci Rep. 2018 Feb 12;8(1):2800. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-21313-0.
10
Subcutaneous endoscopically assisted ligation of spermatic vessels (SEAL-SV) using an epidural-&-spinal needle: a novel technique to repair adolescent varicocele.使用硬膜外和脊髓穿刺针进行皮下内镜辅助精索血管结扎术(SEAL-SV):一种修复青少年精索静脉曲张的新技术。
Pediatr Surg Int. 2017 Aug;33(8):917-919. doi: 10.1007/s00383-017-4117-0. Epub 2017 Jun 21.