Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗穿孔性消化性溃疡:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcer: A meta analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, PR China.

Department of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, PR China.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2016 Sep;33 Pt A:124-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.07.077. Epub 2016 Aug 5.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The role of laparoscopic surgery in the repair for peptic ulcer disease is unclear. The present study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic versus open repair for peptic ulcer disease.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open repair for peptic ulcer disease were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and references of identified articles and relevant reviews. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications, mortality, and reoperation. Secondary outcomes were operative time, postoperative pain, postoperative hospital stay, nasogastric tube duration, and time to resume diet. Statistical analysis was carried out by Review Manage software.

RESULTS

Five RCTs investigating a total of 549 patients, of whom, 279 received laparoscopic repair and 270 received open repair, were included in the final analysis. There were no significant differences between these two procedures in some primary outcomes including overal postoperative complication rate, mortality, and reoperation rate. Subcategory analysis of postoperative complications showed that laparoscopic repair had also similar rates of repair site leakage, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, pneumonia, and urinary tract infection as open surgery, except of the lower surgical site infection rate (P < 0.05). In addition, there were also no significant differences between these two procedures in some second outcomes including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and time to resume diet, but laparoscopic repair had shorter nasogastric tube duration (P < 0.05) and less postoperative pain (P < 0.05) than open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is comparable with open surgery in the setting of repair for perforated peptic ulcer. The obvious advantages of laparoscopic surgery are the lower surgical site infection rate, shorter nasogastric tube duration and less postoperative pain. However, more higher quality studies should be undertaken to further assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repair for peptic ulcer disease.

摘要

简介

腹腔镜手术在治疗消化性溃疡穿孔中的作用尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗消化性溃疡穿孔的安全性和疗效。

方法

从 MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和已确定文章的参考文献以及相关综述中检索比较腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗消化性溃疡穿孔的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局为术后并发症、死亡率和再次手术。次要结局为手术时间、术后疼痛、术后住院时间、鼻胃管持续时间和恢复饮食时间。采用 Review Manage 软件进行统计学分析。

结果

共纳入 5 项 RCT 研究,共 549 例患者,其中 279 例接受腹腔镜手术,270 例接受开腹手术。两种手术在总体术后并发症发生率、死亡率和再次手术率等一些主要结局方面无显著差异。术后并发症的亚组分析显示,腹腔镜手术与开腹手术在手术部位漏、腹腔脓肿、术后肠梗阻、肺炎和尿路感染等方面的发生率相似,而手术部位感染率较低(P<0.05)。此外,两种手术在手术时间、术后住院时间和恢复饮食时间等一些次要结局方面也无显著差异,但腹腔镜手术的鼻胃管持续时间更短(P<0.05),术后疼痛较轻(P<0.05)。

结论

腹腔镜手术与开腹手术在治疗穿孔性消化性溃疡方面效果相当。腹腔镜手术的明显优势在于手术部位感染率较低、鼻胃管持续时间较短和术后疼痛较轻。然而,还需要开展更多高质量的研究来进一步评估腹腔镜治疗消化性溃疡穿孔的安全性和疗效。

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