• 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

单孔胆囊切除术治疗胆囊炎与非胆囊炎。

Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis.

机构信息

Surgical Clinic Unit I, Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), Genoa University, Genoa, Italy.

Unit of Clinical Epidemiology and Trials, National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy.

出版信息

JSLS. 2022 Jul-Sep;26(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020.

DOI:10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020
PMID:35967963
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9355797/
Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) for the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis in different gallbladder pathologic conditions.

METHODS

All patients who underwent SPLC in our department between October 1, 2017 and March 31, 2020 were registered consecutively in a prospective database. Patients' charts were retrospectively divided according to histological diagnosis: normal gallbladder (NG) (n = 13), chronic cholecystitis (CC) (n =47), and acute cholecystitis (AC) (n = 10). The parameters for assessing the procedure outcome included operative time, blood loss, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Patient groups were statistically compared.

RESULTS

Seventy patients underwent SPLC. Duration of surgery increased from NG (55 ± 22.7 min) to CC (70 ± 33.5 min), and to AC patients (110.5 ± 50.5 min), which is statistically significant (=.001). Postoperative complication rates were 7.6% in NG patients, 17% in CC, and 30% in AC (=.442). Length of hospitalization was shorter for NG patients (1.0 ± 0.6 days) versus CC (2.0 ± 1.1 days) and AC patients (2.0 ± 4.7 days), with statistical significance (= .020). Multivariate analysis found that pathology type and the occurrence of postoperative complications were independent predictors for prolonged operative times and prolonged hospital stay, respectively.

CONCLUSION

SPLC is feasible for acute and chronic cholecystitis with good procedural outcomes. Since SPLC technique itself can be sometimes challenging with the existing technology, its application, especially in cases of acute cholecystitis, should be done with caution. Only prospective randomized studies on this approach for acute and chronic gallbladder diseases will assess the complete reliability of this technique.

摘要

背景与目的

评估单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SPLC)治疗不同胆囊病理条件下有症状胆石症的安全性和疗效。

方法

我们部门于 2017 年 10 月 1 日至 2020 年 3 月 31 日连续登记了所有接受 SPLC 的患者,将患者的病历根据组织学诊断分为:正常胆囊(NG)(n=13)、慢性胆囊炎(CC)(n=47)和急性胆囊炎(AC)(n=10)。评估手术结果的参数包括手术时间、出血量、使用额外的 Trocar、中转开腹、术中及术后并发症和住院时间。对患者组进行统计学比较。

结果

70 例患者行 SPLC,手术时间从 NG(55±22.7 分钟)增加到 CC(70±33.5 分钟),再增加到 AC 患者(110.5±50.5 分钟),差异有统计学意义(=.001)。NG 患者术后并发症发生率为 7.6%,CC 患者为 17%,AC 患者为 30%(=.442)。NG 患者的住院时间(1.0±0.6 天)明显短于 CC(2.0±1.1 天)和 AC 患者(2.0±4.7 天),差异有统计学意义(=.020)。多变量分析发现,病理类型和术后并发症的发生是手术时间延长和住院时间延长的独立预测因素。

结论

SPLC 治疗急性和慢性胆囊炎是可行的,手术效果良好。由于现有技术,SPLC 技术本身有时具有挑战性,因此其应用,特别是在急性胆囊炎的情况下,应谨慎进行。只有针对急性和慢性胆囊疾病的前瞻性随机研究才能评估该技术的完全可靠性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4b3/9355797/0157b4f280e3/LS-JSLS220035F002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4b3/9355797/39826d63093c/LS-JSLS220035F001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4b3/9355797/0157b4f280e3/LS-JSLS220035F002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4b3/9355797/39826d63093c/LS-JSLS220035F001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d4b3/9355797/0157b4f280e3/LS-JSLS220035F002.jpg

相似文献

1
Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis.单孔胆囊切除术治疗胆囊炎与非胆囊炎。
JSLS. 2022 Jul-Sep;26(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020.
2
Laparoscopic Single-Port Versus Traditional Multi-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.腹腔镜单孔与传统多孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术
JSLS. 2019 Jul-Sep;23(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2018.00102.
3
Single-incision vs three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for complicated and uncomplicated acute cholecystitis.单切口与三切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗复杂和非复杂急性胆囊炎的比较。
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 21;19(43):7743-50. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i43.7743.
4
Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎的可行性
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Dec 25;7(19):1327-33. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i19.1327.
5
Efficacy and safety of B-mode ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis in elderly and high-risk patients.B超引导下经皮经肝胆囊穿刺引流联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗老年高危急性胆囊炎的疗效及安全性
BMC Gastroenterol. 2015 Jul 9;15:81. doi: 10.1186/s12876-015-0294-2.
6
Single-port versus multi-port cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis: a retrospective comparative analysis.单孔与多孔胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎患者的回顾性对比分析。
Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2011 Oct;10(5):521-5. doi: 10.1016/s1499-3872(11)60088-x.
7
Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: A retrospective cohort study of 52 consecutive patients.单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎:52 例连续患者的回顾性队列研究。
Int J Surg. 2015 May;17:48-53. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.03.013. Epub 2015 Mar 23.
8
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: prospective trial.腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎:前瞻性试验。
World J Surg. 1997 Jun;21(5):540-5. doi: 10.1007/pl00012283.
9
The impact of dementia on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis and acute cholecystitis: A retrospective study.痴呆对有症状胆石症和急性胆囊炎行腹腔镜胆囊切除术手术结局的影响:一项回顾性研究。
Asian J Endosc Surg. 2020 Jul;13(3):351-358. doi: 10.1111/ases.12743. Epub 2019 Aug 7.
10
Safety and feasibility of needlescopic grasper-assisted single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with acute cholecystitis: comparison with three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.针状内镜抓钳辅助单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎患者的安全性和可行性:与三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的比较
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2014 Aug;24(8):523-7. doi: 10.1089/lap.2013.0552. Epub 2014 May 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of a Local Anesthetic Injection Kit on Pain Relief and Postoperative Recovery After Transumbilical Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.局部麻醉注射套件对经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术后疼痛缓解及术后恢复的影响
J Pain Res. 2023 Aug 11;16:2791-2801. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S422454. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Laparoscopic Single-Port Versus Traditional Multi-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.腹腔镜单孔与传统多孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术
JSLS. 2019 Jul-Sep;23(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2018.00102.
2
Safety and Efficiency of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Obese Patients: A Case-Matched Comparative Analysis.肥胖患者单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的安全性和有效性:病例匹配对比分析
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2019 Aug;29(8):1005-1010. doi: 10.1089/lap.2018.0728. Epub 2019 Jun 24.
3
European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery.
欧洲内镜外科学会(EAES)关于单切口内镜手术的共识声明。
Surg Endosc. 2019 Apr;33(4):996-1019. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06693-2. Epub 2019 Feb 15.
4
Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial).多端口与单端口胆囊切除术:一项多中心随机对照试验(MUSIC试验)的结果
Surg Endosc. 2017 Jul;31(7):2872-2880. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5298-7. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
5
Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎的可行性
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Dec 25;7(19):1327-33. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i19.1327.
6
Cosmesis and Body Image in Patients Undergoing Single-port Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Multicenter Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial (SPOCC-trial).单孔与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的美容效果和身体形象:一项多中心双盲随机对照试验(SPOCC试验)。
Ann Surg. 2015 Nov;262(5):728-34; discussion 734-5. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001474.
7
Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: A retrospective cohort study of 52 consecutive patients.单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎:52 例连续患者的回顾性队列研究。
Int J Surg. 2015 May;17:48-53. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.03.013. Epub 2015 Mar 23.
8
Single-incision vs three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for complicated and uncomplicated acute cholecystitis.单切口与三切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗复杂和非复杂急性胆囊炎的比较。
World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 21;19(43):7743-50. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i43.7743.
9
Meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC).单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)与传统多孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(CMLC)的前瞻性随机研究的荟萃分析。
J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Sep;16(9):1790-801. doi: 10.1007/s11605-012-1956-9. Epub 2012 Jul 6.
10
Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a higher bile duct injury rate: a review and a word of caution.单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术与更高的胆管损伤率相关:一篇综述及警示。
Ann Surg. 2012 Jul;256(1):1-6. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182583fde.