Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜与小切口开放性阑尾切除术

Laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy.

作者信息

Çiftçi Fatih

机构信息

Fatih Çiftçi, Vocational School of Health Services, Istanbul Gelisim University, Istanbul 34306, Turkey.

出版信息

World J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 Oct 27;7(10):267-72. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i10.267.

Abstract

AIM

To compare laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy in light of recent data at our centre.

METHODS

The data of patients who underwent appendectomy between January 2011 and June 2013 were collected. The data included patients' demographic data, procedure time, length of hospital stay, the need for pain medicine, postoperative visual analog scale of pain, and morbidities. Pregnant women and patients with previous lower abdominal surgery were excluded. Patients with surgery converted from laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) to mini-incision open appendectomy (MOA) were excluded. Patients were divided into two groups: LA and MOA done by the same surgeon. The patients were randomized into MOA and LA groups a computer-generated number. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made by the surgeon with physical examination, laboratory values, and radiological tests (abdominal ultrasound or computed tomography). All operations were performed with general anaesthesia. The postoperative vision analog scale score was recorded at postoperative hours 1, 6, 12, and 24. Patients were discharged when they tolerated normal food and passed gas and were followed up every week for three weeks as outpatients.

RESULTS

Of the 243 patients, 121 (49.9%) underwent MOA, while 122 (50.1%) had laparoscopic appendectomy. There were no significant differences in operation time between the two groups (P = 0.844), whereas the visual analog scale of pain was significantly higher in the open appendectomy group at the 1(st) hour (P = 0.001), 6(th) hour (P = 0.001), and 12(th) hour (P = 0.027). The need for analgesic medication was significantly higher in the MOA group (P = 0.001). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of morbidity rate (P = 0.599). The rate of total complications was similar between the two groups (6.5% in LA vs 7.4% in OA, P = 0.599). All wound infections were treated non-surgically. Six out of seven patients with pelvic abscess were successfully treated with percutaneous drainage; one patient required surgical drainage after a failed percutaneous drainage. There were no differences in the period of hospital stay, operation time, and postoperative complication rate between the two groups. Laparoscopic appendectomy decreases the need for analgesic medications and the visual analog scale of pain.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic appendectomy should be considered as a standard treatment for acute appendicitis. Mini-incision appendectomy is an alternative for a select group of patients.

摘要

目的

根据我们中心的最新数据,比较腹腔镜与小切口开放性阑尾切除术。

方法

收集2011年1月至2013年6月期间接受阑尾切除术患者的数据。数据包括患者的人口统计学数据、手术时间、住院时间、止痛药使用需求、术后疼痛视觉模拟评分以及发病率。排除孕妇和既往有下腹部手术史的患者。排除由腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)转为小切口开放性阑尾切除术(MOA)的患者。患者分为两组:由同一位外科医生进行的LA组和MOA组。通过计算机生成的数字将患者随机分为MOA组和LA组。由外科医生通过体格检查、实验室检查结果和影像学检查(腹部超声或计算机断层扫描)做出急性阑尾炎的诊断。所有手术均在全身麻醉下进行。术后在第1、6、12和24小时记录视觉模拟评分。患者能够耐受正常饮食且排气后出院,并作为门诊患者每周随访三周。

结果

243例患者中,121例(49.9%)接受了MOA,122例(50.1%)接受了腹腔镜阑尾切除术。两组手术时间无显著差异(P = 0.844),而开放性阑尾切除术组在第1小时(P = 0.001)、第6小时(P = 0.001)和第12小时(P = 0.027)的疼痛视觉模拟评分显著更高。MOA组止痛药使用需求显著更高(P = 0.001)。两组发病率无差异(P = 0.599)。两组总并发症发生率相似(LA组为6.5%,OA组为7.4%,P = 0.599)。所有伤口感染均采用非手术治疗。7例盆腔脓肿患者中有6例通过经皮引流成功治疗;1例经皮引流失败后需要手术引流。两组住院时间、手术时间和术后并发症发生率无差异。腹腔镜阑尾切除术减少了止痛药使用需求和疼痛视觉模拟评分。

结论

腹腔镜阑尾切除术应被视为急性阑尾炎的标准治疗方法。小切口阑尾切除术是特定患者群体的一种替代选择。

相似文献

1
Laparoscopic vs mini-incision open appendectomy.
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 Oct 27;7(10):267-72. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i10.267.
2
Mini-incision open appendectomy versus laparoscopic appendectomy: An experience in a rural hospital.
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2021 May;27(3):310-314. doi: 10.14744/tjtes.2020.83023.
3
Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy. Prospective randomized study of outcomes.
Arch Surg. 1997 Jul;132(7):708-11; discussion 712. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1997.01430310022003.
7
Needlescopic, laparoscopic, and open appendectomy: a comparative study.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2001 Oct;11(5):306-12. doi: 10.1097/00129689-200110000-00004.
8
A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic appendectomy with open appendectomy. Laparoscopic Appendectomy Study Group.
Am J Surg. 1995 Feb;169(2):208-12; discussion 212-3. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(99)80138-x.
10
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.
J Am Coll Surg. 2007 Jul;205(1):60-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.03.017.

本文引用的文献

5
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in treatment of acute appendicitis.
Bratisl Lek Listy. 2014;115(10):660-2. doi: 10.4149/bll_2014_127.
6
Management of appendiceal stump in laparoscopic appendectomy--clips or ligature: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015 Jan;25(1):21-7. doi: 10.1089/lap.2014.0470. Epub 2014 Dec 30.
7
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional laparoscopy in adults. A systematic review.
Acta Cir Bras. 2014 Dec;29(12):826-31. doi: 10.1590/S0102-86502014001900010.
8
Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy for complicated appendicitis in high risk patients.
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2015 Mar;30(3):397-401. doi: 10.1007/s00384-014-2095-4. Epub 2014 Dec 16.
9
Laparoscopic Appendectomy Is Safe: Influence of Appendectomy Technique on Surgical-site Infections and Intra-abdominal Abscesses.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2015 Jun;25(3):e90-4. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000115.
10

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