Suppr超能文献

肝包虫囊肿的手术治疗方法比较分析:传统与微创技术。

Comparative analysis of surgical management approaches for hydatid liver cysts: conventional vs. minimally invasive techniques.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Organ Transplant Section, Hamad Medical Corporation, P.O. Box 3050, Doha, Qatar.

Department of Surgery, Sohag University, Sohag, Egypt.

出版信息

Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Aug 18;408(1):320. doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03043-8.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Hydatid liver disease is a prevalent condition in endemic areas, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa. The use of laparoscopy as a treatment option has gained popularity. However, there is still ongoing debate regarding the optimal approach for surgical management. In this study, we present our experience with the surgical treatment of hydatid liver disease comparing conventional and minimally invasive approaches, including laparoscopic and robotic options.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent surgery for hydatid liver disease at our institution. Data was collected on the patients' clinical presentations, cyst characteristics, surgical procedures performed, intraoperative findings, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 98 hydatid liver cysts were surgically managed in 57 patients. The mean age of the patients was 37.2 ± 10.2 years, with 38 (66.7%) being male. Among the patients, 14 (24.6%) underwent conventional surgery (6 partial pericystectomy, 4 total pericystectomy, and 4 liver resection), 37 (64.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgery (31 partial pericystectomy, 4 total pericystectomy, and 2 liver resection), and 6 (10.5%) underwent robotic surgery (6 partial pericystectomy). There were no significant differences between the conventional surgery and minimally invasive groups in terms of patient age, gender, cyst size, or number. However, laparotomy was associated with a higher number of total pericystectomy and liver resection procedures compared to the minimally invasive approach (P = 0.010). Nonetheless, the operation time and blood loss were comparable between both groups. Perioperative complications occurred in 19 (33.3%) patients, with 16 (84%) experiencing minor issues. Bile leak occurred in 8 (14%) patients, resolving spontaneously in 5 patients. There was no significant difference (P = 0.314) in the incidence of complications between the two groups. Conventional surgery, however, was associated with a significantly longer hospital stay (P = 0.034). During follow-up, there were no cases of mortality or cyst recurrence in our cohort.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approaches for hydatid liver cysts offer advantages such as shorter hospitalization and potentially quicker recovery, making them valuable treatment options when accompanied by careful patient selection and adherence to proper surgical techniques.

摘要

简介

肝包虫病在流行地区较为常见,特别是在中东和北非地区。腹腔镜作为一种治疗选择已经得到了广泛应用。然而,对于手术治疗的最佳方法仍存在争议。在本研究中,我们介绍了我们使用传统和微创方法(包括腹腔镜和机器人手术)治疗肝包虫病的经验。

方法

我们对在我院接受手术治疗的肝包虫病患者进行了回顾性研究。收集了患者的临床表现、囊肿特征、手术过程、术中发现和术后并发症等数据。

结果

共有 57 例患者的 98 个肝包虫囊肿接受了手术治疗。患者的平均年龄为 37.2±10.2 岁,男性 38 例(66.7%)。其中,14 例(24.6%)接受了传统手术(6 例部分肝包虫外囊切除术、4 例肝包虫外囊全部切除术和 4 例肝切除术),37 例(64.9%)接受了腹腔镜手术(31 例部分肝包虫外囊切除术、4 例肝包虫外囊全部切除术和 2 例肝切除术),6 例(10.5%)接受了机器人手术(6 例部分肝包虫外囊切除术)。传统手术组和微创组在患者年龄、性别、囊肿大小或数量方面无显著差异。然而,与微创方法相比,剖腹手术与更多的肝包虫外囊全部切除术和肝切除术相关(P=0.010)。尽管如此,两组的手术时间和失血量相当。19 例(33.3%)患者发生围手术期并发症,其中 16 例(84%)为轻微并发症。8 例(14%)患者发生胆漏,其中 5 例自行缓解。两组并发症发生率无显著差异(P=0.314)。然而,传统手术组的住院时间明显更长(P=0.034)。在随访期间,我们的队列中没有死亡或囊肿复发的病例。

结论

对于肝包虫囊肿,微创方法具有住院时间短和恢复更快的优点,在精心选择患者并遵循适当的手术技术的情况下,是有价值的治疗选择。

相似文献

5
Central Pericystectomy for Hydatid Cyst Treatment.中央包虫外膜切除术治疗包虫囊肿。
J Gastrointest Surg. 2023 Jul;27(7):1496-1497. doi: 10.1007/s11605-023-05628-6. Epub 2023 Apr 17.
6
Laparoscopic pericystectomy for hydatid cyst of the liver.腹腔镜下肝包虫囊肿囊肿切除术
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2010 Feb;20(1):24-6. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181cdf3c4.
8
Hepatic hydatid: PAIR, drain or resect?肝包虫病:PAIR、引流还是切除?
J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Oct;15(10):1829-36. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1649-9. Epub 2011 Aug 9.
9
Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Surgery in the Treatment of Renal Hydatid Cysts.腹腔镜与开放性手术治疗肾包虫囊肿的比较。
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2022 Apr;32(4):427-431. doi: 10.1089/lap.2021.0031. Epub 2021 Apr 12.
10
Risk for laparoscopic fenestration of liver cysts.肝囊肿腹腔镜开窗术的风险。
Surg Endosc. 2003 Nov;17(11):1735-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-9106-1. Epub 2003 Jun 17.

引用本文的文献

3
Current considerations for the management of liver echinococcosis.肝包虫病管理的当前考量因素
World J Gastroenterol. 2025 Mar 14;31(10):103973. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i10.103973.

本文引用的文献

1
Hydatid Disease of the Liver in the Middle East: A Single Center Experience.中东地区肝脏包虫病:单中心经验
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2022 Feb;23(1):29-34. doi: 10.1089/sur.2021.097. Epub 2021 Sep 23.
2
Robotic resection for hydatid disease of the liver.机器人辅助肝包虫病切除术。
BMJ Case Rep. 2021 Jun 21;14(6):e241681. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2021-241681.
3
Echinococcosis: Advances in the 21st Century.包虫病:21 世纪的进展。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019 Feb 13;32(2). doi: 10.1128/CMR.00075-18. Print 2019 Mar 20.

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