Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中建立气腹的闭合式与开放式方法比较

Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

作者信息

Agarwal Puneet K, Golmei Jason, Goyal Richa, Maurya Ajeet P

机构信息

General Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhopal, Bhopal, IND.

Obstetrics and Gynecology Surgery, Dr. Agarwal Clinic, Jalesar, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2023 Mar 10;15(3):e35991. doi: 10.7759/cureus.35991. eCollection 2023 Mar.

Abstract

To study the efficacy of closed and open methods for creating pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy by comparing the two in terms of their outcome and complication. : Single-centre, prospective, observational study. : Purposive sampling method where the inclusion criteria were all patients with cholelithiasis who were advised and consented to laparoscopic cholecystectomy of age 18-70 years were included in the study group. Exclusion criteria include patients with a paraumbilical hernia, a history of upper abdominal surgery, uncontrolled systemic illness, and local skin infection. Sixty cases of cholelithiasis satisfying exclusion and inclusion criteria who underwent elective cholecystectomy during the study period were included. Thirty-one of these cases underwent the closed method, while in the remaining 29 patients open method was adopted. Cases in which pneumoperitoneum created by closed technique were grouped as group A and those by open technique as group B. Parameters comparing the safety and efficacy of the two methods were studied. The parameters were access time, gas leak, visceral injury, vascular injury, need for conversion, umbilical port site hematoma, umbilical port site infection, and hernia. Patients were assessed on the first postoperative day, the seventh postoperative day, and then two months after surgery. Some follow-ups were done telephonically. : Out of 60 patients, 31 underwent the closed method, while 29 underwent the open method. Minor complications like gas leak during the procedure was observed more in the open method. The mean access time in the open-method group was less than in the closed-method group. Other complications like visceral injury, vascular injury, need for conversion, umbilical port site hematoma, umbilical port site infection, and hernia were not observed in either group during the allocated follow-up period in the study. : Open technique for pneumoperitoneum is as safe and effective as the closed technique.

摘要

通过比较腹腔镜胆囊切除术中闭合式和开放式建立气腹的效果及并发症来研究其疗效。:单中心、前瞻性观察性研究。:采用目的抽样法,纳入标准为所有年龄在18至70岁、被建议并同意接受腹腔镜胆囊切除术的胆石症患者。排除标准包括患有脐旁疝、有上腹部手术史、未控制的全身性疾病以及局部皮肤感染的患者。纳入在研究期间接受择期胆囊切除术且符合排除和纳入标准的60例胆石症患者。其中31例采用闭合式方法,其余29例采用开放式方法。将通过闭合技术建立气腹的病例归为A组,通过开放技术建立气腹的病例归为B组。研究比较两种方法安全性和有效性的参数。参数包括穿刺时间、气体泄漏、内脏损伤、血管损伤、中转需求、脐部穿刺孔血肿、脐部穿刺孔感染及疝。在术后第1天、术后第7天以及术后两个月对患者进行评估。部分随访通过电话进行。:60例患者中,31例采用闭合式方法,29例采用开放式方法。术中气体泄漏等轻微并发症在开放式方法中观察到的更多。开放式方法组的平均穿刺时间短于闭合式方法组。在研究分配的随访期内,两组均未观察到内脏损伤、血管损伤、中转需求、脐部穿刺孔血肿、脐部穿刺孔感染及疝等其他并发症。:气腹的开放技术与闭合技术一样安全有效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/abd7/10004421/6dcf41920458/cureus-0015-00000035991-i01.jpg

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