Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜妇科手术中直接穿刺套管针(不预先建立气腹)与使用韦氏针充气后穿刺套管针插入的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究

Direct trocar insertion without previous pneumoperitoneum versus insertion after insufflation with Veress needle in laparoscopic gynecological surgery: a prospective cohort study.

作者信息

Pantoja Garrido Manuel, Frías Sánchez Zoraida, Zapardiel Gutiérrez Ignacio, Torrejón Rafael, Jiménez Sánchez Cecilia, Polo Velasco Alfredo, Márquez Maraver Francisco, Rodríguez Jiménez Inmaculada, Jiménez Gallardo Julián, Fernández Alba Juan Jesús

机构信息

Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Virgen Macarena , Seville , Spain.

Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío , Seville , Spain.

出版信息

J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019 Oct;39(7):1000-1005. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2019.1590804. Epub 2019 Jun 18.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether direct trocar entry without prior pneumoperitoneum at umbilical level (DTI) can be a safe alternative to access the abdominal cavity in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. We present a prospective observational analytical study of cohorts, comparing DTI with umbilical entry with trocar after previous insufflation with a Veress needle at umbilical level (V). The study period was performed from June 2013 to April 2016; data was collected on 600 patients who underwent gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. There were no significant differences in the risk of suffering a complication during the access manoeuvres between DTI (6.49%) and V (7.39%), OR 0.89 (95% CI: 0.42-1.81). The duration of the access manoeuvres was 69 s in DTI and 193 s in V ( < .001). The percentage of patients in whom two or more access attempts were performed was lower in DTI (7.8%) than in V (12.3%) ( > .05). We concluded that DTI is at least as safe as V, regarding the risk of suffering complications arising from access into the abdominal cavity. DTI has advantages with regard to V, such as: the shorter duration of access manoeuvres or the lesser number of unsuccessful entry or insufflation attempts. Impact statement There are few international publications comparing DTI and V. When we conducted a search in PubMed for the terms 'Veress needle and direct trocar insertion', 51 publications were obtained. When we increased the restriction and added the terms 'laparoscopic entry and laparoscopy complications', 27 publications were obtained; thus, the uniqueness of our study. We present a 3-year observational prospective study of cohorts that included 600 patients. The aim of this study was to determine that in laparoscopic gynaecological surgery, DTI is an access method to the abdominal cavity at least as safe as V, with respect to the risk of complications. On the other hand, DTI has some advantages such as the shorter duration of access manoeuvres or the lower number of failed entry attempts. Given the limited number of publications that compared both techniques, our study indicates that DTI can be a safe alternative for access to abdominal cavity in gynaecological surgery, compared to the traditional V.

摘要

本研究的目的是确定在妇科腹腔镜手术中,脐部水平直接穿刺套管针进入腹腔(DTI)而不预先建立气腹是否可作为一种安全的腹腔进入方式。我们进行了一项前瞻性队列观察分析研究,将DTI与脐部使用Veress针预先充气后再穿刺套管针进入腹腔(V)的方法进行比较。研究时间为2013年6月至2016年4月;收集了600例行妇科腹腔镜手术患者的数据。DTI组(6.49%)和气腹组(7.39%)在进入操作过程中发生并发症的风险无显著差异,比值比为0.89(95%可信区间:0.42 - 1.81)。DTI组进入操作的持续时间为69秒,气腹组为193秒(P < 0.001)。进行两次或更多次进入尝试的患者百分比在DTI组(7.8%)低于气腹组(12.3%)(P > 0.05)。我们得出结论,就腹腔进入相关并发症的风险而言,DTI至少与气腹法一样安全。DTI相对于气腹法具有一些优势,例如:进入操作持续时间更短,不成功的穿刺或充气尝试次数更少。影响声明 比较DTI和气腹法的国际出版物很少。当我们在PubMed中搜索“Veress针和直接穿刺套管针插入”时,获得了51篇出版物。当我们增加限制条件并添加“腹腔镜进入和腹腔镜并发症”等术语时,获得了27篇出版物;因此,我们的研究具有独特性。我们进行了一项为期3年的前瞻性队列观察研究,纳入了600例患者。本研究的目的是确定在腹腔镜妇科手术中,就并发症风险而言,DTI是一种至少与气腹法一样安全的腹腔进入方法。另一方面,DTI具有一些优势,如进入操作持续时间更短或穿刺失败尝试次数更少。鉴于比较这两种技术的出版物数量有限,我们的研究表明,与传统的气腹法相比,DTI可作为妇科手术中腹腔进入的一种安全替代方法。

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