Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜手术与开放手术治疗急性粘连性小肠梗阻:一项倾向评分匹配分析

Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Acute Adhesive Small-Bowel Obstruction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

作者信息

Hackenberg T, Mentula P, Leppäniemi A, Sallinen V

机构信息

1 Department of Abdominal Surgery, Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

2 Department of Transplantation and Liver Surgery, Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

出版信息

Scand J Surg. 2017 Mar;106(1):28-33. doi: 10.1177/1457496916641341. Epub 2016 Jul 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The laparoscopic approach has been increasingly used to treat adhesive small-bowel obstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of a laparoscopic versus an open approach for adhesive small-bowel obstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected on patients who had surgery for adhesive small-bowel obstruction at a single academic center between January 2010 and December 2012. Patients with a contraindication for the laparoscopic approach were excluded. A propensity score was used to match patients in the laparoscopic and open surgery groups based on their preoperative parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients underwent laparoscopic adhesiolysis and 67 patients open adhesiolysis. The open adhesiolysis group had more suspected bowel strangulations and more previous abdominal surgeries than the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group. Severe complication rate (Clavien-Dindo 3 or higher) was 0% in the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group versus 14% in the open adhesiolysis group ( p = 0.052). Twenty-five propensity score-matched patients from the open adhesiolysis group were similar to laparoscopic adhesiolysis group patients with regard to their preoperative parameters. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic adhesiolysis group compared to the propensity score-matched open adhesiolysis group (6.0 vs 10.0 days, p = 0.037), but no differences were found in severe complications between the laparoscopic adhesiolysis and propensity score-matched open adhesiolysis groups (0% vs 4%, p = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

Patients selected to be operated by the open approach had higher preoperative morbidity than the ones selected for the laparoscopic approach. After matching for this disparity, the laparoscopic approach was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without differences in complications. The laparoscopic approach may be a preferable approach in selected patients.

摘要

背景与目的

腹腔镜手术已越来越多地用于治疗粘连性小肠梗阻。本研究旨在比较腹腔镜手术与开放手术治疗粘连性小肠梗阻的疗效。

材料与方法

回顾性收集2010年1月至2012年12月在某单一学术中心接受粘连性小肠梗阻手术患者的数据。排除有腹腔镜手术禁忌证的患者。采用倾向评分法根据术前参数对腹腔镜手术组和开放手术组患者进行匹配。

结果

共有25例患者接受了腹腔镜粘连松解术,67例患者接受了开放粘连松解术。开放粘连松解术组比腹腔镜粘连松解术组有更多疑似肠绞窄病例和更多既往腹部手术史。腹腔镜粘连松解术组严重并发症发生率(Clavien-Dindo 3级及以上)为0%,而开放粘连松解术组为14%(p = 0.052)。开放粘连松解术组25例倾向评分匹配患者在术前参数方面与腹腔镜粘连松解术组患者相似。与倾向评分匹配的开放粘连松解术组相比,腹腔镜粘连松解术组住院时间更短(6.0天对10.0天,p = 0.037),但腹腔镜粘连松解术组与倾向评分匹配的开放粘连松解术组在严重并发症方面无差异(0%对4%,p = 0.31)。

结论

选择开放手术的患者术前发病率高于选择腹腔镜手术的患者。在对这种差异进行匹配后,腹腔镜手术与较短的住院时间相关,且并发症无差异。对于选定患者,腹腔镜手术可能是更可取的手术方式。

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