• 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

相似文献

1
Single-Incision Hysterectomy Outcomes With and Without Robotic Assistance.单切口子宫切除术在有或没有机器人辅助情况下的结果。
JSLS. 2019 Oct-Dec;23(4). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2019.00046.
2
Comparing Single-Site and Multiport Robotic Hysterectomy with Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping for Endometrial Cancer: Surgical Outcomes and Cost Analysis.单部位与多端口机器人子宫切除术联合前哨淋巴结定位治疗子宫内膜癌的比较:手术结果与成本分析
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Sep-Oct;24(6):977-983. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.05.016. Epub 2017 Jun 7.
3
Cost comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy.机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术与标准腹腔镜子宫切除术的成本比较
J Robot Surg. 2015 Dec;9(4):269-75. doi: 10.1007/s11701-015-0526-z. Epub 2015 Jul 30.
4
Comparison of surgical outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy in gynecologic benign disease: a single-center cohort study.机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统全腹腔镜子宫切除术治疗妇科良性疾病的手术效果比较:一项单中心队列研究
J Robot Surg. 2023 Oct;17(5):2221-2228. doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01638-3. Epub 2023 Jun 6.
5
Robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy.机器人辅助全腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统全腹腔镜子宫切除术的比较
JSLS. 2009 Jul-Sep;13(3):364-9.
6
An analysis of the impact of previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience on the learning curve for robotic hysterectomy.既往腹腔镜子宫切除术经验对机器人辅助子宫切除术学习曲线影响的分析
J Robot Surg. 2013 Sep;7(3):295-9. doi: 10.1007/s11701-012-0388-6. Epub 2013 Feb 27.
7
Outcomes in women undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy at a tertiary hospital in Western Australia.在西澳大利亚一家三级医院,接受机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术的女性与接受传统腹腔镜子宫切除术的女性的治疗结果比较。
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Aug;58(4):443-448. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12749. Epub 2017 Nov 23.
8
Gynecologic robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: prospective analysis of feasibility, safety, and technique.妇科机器人腹腔镜单孔手术:可行性、安全性和技术的前瞻性分析。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;212(2):179.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.057. Epub 2014 Aug 1.
9
The learning curve of introduced robotic-assisted hysterectomy versus skilled laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynecologic diseases.引入的机器人辅助子宫切除术与熟练的腹腔镜子宫切除术治疗良性妇科疾病的学习曲线。
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2023 Oct;49(10):2494-2500. doi: 10.1111/jog.15741. Epub 2023 Jul 26.
10
Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Clinical Factors that Affect Operative Times and Techniques to Overcome Difficulties.经脐单孔腹腔镜全子宫切除术:影响手术时间的临床因素及克服困难的技术
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 May-Jun;24(4):617-625. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.01.021. Epub 2017 Feb 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Designing a core data set for benign hysterectomy registration system and its implementation in a referral teaching hospital in Northwest Iran.设计良性子宫切除术登记系统的核心数据集及其在伊朗西北部一家转诊教学医院的实施。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Jul 3;24(1):460. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06656-z.
2
Therapeutic effect of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic surgery versus triple-port laparoscopic surgery for ovarian cyst.经脐单孔腹腔镜手术与三孔腹腔镜手术治疗卵巢囊肿的疗效比较
Am J Transl Res. 2021 Dec 15;13(12):14023-14030. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Nationwide trends in the utilization of and payments for hysterectomy in the United States among commercially insured women.美国商业保险女性子宫切除术的利用和支付的全国趋势。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;218(4):425.e1-425.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.218. Epub 2017 Dec 26.
2
Postoperative Pain After Single-Site Versus Multiport Hysterectomy.单孔与多孔子宫切除术后的疼痛
JSLS. 2017 Oct-Dec;21(4). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2017.00065.
3
Laparoscopic Single-Incision Supracervical Hysterectomy for an Extremely Large Uterus with Bag Tissue Extraction.经阴道单切口腹腔镜下宫骶韧带悬吊术治疗阔韧带肌瘤
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Jul-Aug;25(5):768. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.10.023. Epub 2017 Nov 22.
4
Trocar site hernia following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a 10-year single center experience.腹腔镜胆囊切除术后套管针穿刺部位疝:单中心10年经验
Hernia. 2017 Dec;21(6):925-932. doi: 10.1007/s10029-017-1699-3. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
5
Outpatient Hysterectomy Volume in the United States.美国门诊子宫切除术的数量
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jul;130(1):130-137. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002103.
6
Committee Opinion No 701: Choosing the Route of Hysterectomy for Benign Disease.委员会意见 701:选择良性疾病的子宫切除术途径。
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jun;129(6):e155-e159. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002112.
7
Cost of New Technologies in Prostate Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review of Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy, Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy, and Proton Beam Therapy.前列腺癌治疗新技术的成本:机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术、调强放疗和质子束治疗的成本和成本效益的系统评价。
Eur Urol. 2017 Nov;72(5):712-735. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.028. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
8
Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus conventional laparoscopy for hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.腹腔镜单孔手术与传统腹腔镜手术治疗子宫切除术的系统评价和荟萃分析
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017 May;295(5):1089-1103. doi: 10.1007/s00404-017-4323-y. Epub 2017 Mar 29.
9
Vaginal Tissue Extraction Made Easy.轻松进行阴道组织提取。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Jul-Aug;24(5):726. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.02.005. Epub 2017 Feb 14.
10
Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.全腹腔镜子宫切除术与经阴道子宫切除术:一项系统评价与Meta分析
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Feb;24(2):206-217.e22. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2016.10.020. Epub 2016 Nov 17.

单切口子宫切除术在有或没有机器人辅助情况下的结果。

Single-Incision Hysterectomy Outcomes With and Without Robotic Assistance.

作者信息

Zhang Yiming, Kohn Jaden R, Guan Xiaoming

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.

出版信息

JSLS. 2019 Oct-Dec;23(4). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2019.00046.

DOI:10.4293/JSLS.2019.00046
PMID:31892789
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6924503/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the differences in operative time and postoperative complications for total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) performed using conventional laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) versus a robotic-assisted LESS approach.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of all cases of conventional LESS TLH (n = 47) and robotic LESS TLH (n = 129) for benign gynecologic conditions performed from November 2014 to October 2017. Patient characteristics, operative time for hysterectomy, estimated blood loss, duration of hospitalization, and short-term postoperative complications were compared using appropriate parametric and nonparametric statistical tests.

RESULTS

Conventional LESS TLH cases had a 16.36-minute longer mean operative time for hysterectomy ( < .01). No difference was found in uterine weight, estimated blood loss, hospitalization, or incidence of postoperative complications when LESS TLH was performed with or without robotic assistance. When comparing uterine weight < 100 g, conventional LESS TLH cases had significantly greater operative time than the robotic LESS TLH cases (78.10 ± 23.97 minutes vs. 59.97 ± 35.17 minutes, < .01). When comparing uterine weight > 100 g, conventional LESS TLH cases again had significantly greater operative time than the robotic LESS TLH cases (98.73 ± 50.16 minutes vs. 80.00 ± 42.97 minutes, < .01). There was no difference in postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Robotic single-incision laparoscopy can result in decreased operative time compared to a conventional LESS approach. Robotic-assisted and conventional LESS are similar in rate of postoperative complications, if performed by surgeons with abundant LESS experience.

摘要

目的

评估采用传统腹腔镜单孔手术(LESS)与机器人辅助LESS方法进行全腹腔镜子宫切除术(TLH)时手术时间和术后并发症的差异。

方法

对2014年11月至2017年10月期间因良性妇科疾病进行传统LESS TLH(n = 47)和机器人LESS TLH(n = 129)的所有病例进行回顾性研究。使用适当的参数和非参数统计检验比较患者特征、子宫切除术的手术时间、估计失血量、住院时间和术后短期并发症。

结果

传统LESS TLH病例的子宫切除术平均手术时间长16.36分钟(P <.01)。LESS TLH在有或没有机器人辅助的情况下进行时,子宫重量、估计失血量、住院时间或术后并发症发生率均无差异。比较子宫重量<100 g时,传统LESS TLH病例的手术时间明显长于机器人LESS TLH病例(78.10±23.97分钟对59.97±35.17分钟,P <.01)。比较子宫重量>100 g时,传统LESS TLH病例的手术时间再次明显长于机器人LESS TLH病例(98.73±50.16分钟对80.00±42.97分钟,P <.01)。术后并发症无差异。

结论

与传统LESS方法相比,机器人单切口腹腔镜手术可缩短手术时间。如果由有丰富LESS经验的外科医生进行,机器人辅助和传统LESS在术后并发症发生率方面相似。