• 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

腹壁粘连是否使妇科机器人手术变得困难?

Does the presence of abdominal wall adhesions make gynecologic robotic surgery difficult?

机构信息

Department of Gynecology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, 1-1-1 Kofu, Fujimi, Yamanashi, 400-0027, Japan.

出版信息

J Robot Surg. 2024 Apr 13;18(1):173. doi: 10.1007/s11701-024-01938-2.

DOI:10.1007/s11701-024-01938-2
PMID:38613656
Abstract

This study aimed to assess the status of abdominal wall adhesions resulting from prior surgeries and their impact on the outcomes of robotic surgery. We retrospectively reviewed clinical information, surgical outcomes, and the status of abdominal wall adhesions in patients who underwent gynecologic robotic surgery at Yamanashi Central Hospital, between April 2018 and March 2023. Abdominal wall adhesions were classified into seven locations and their presence was assessed at each site. Among the 768 cases examined, 196 showed the presence of abdominal wall adhesions. Notably, patients with a history of abdominal surgery exhibited a significantly higher incidence of abdominal wall adhesions than those without such surgical history, although no significant difference was observed in the frequency of adhesions in the upper left abdomen. Patients with a history of gynecologic, gastrointestinal, or biliopancreatic surgeries were more likely to have adhesions at the umbilicus or upper abdomen sites where trocars are typically inserted during robotic surgery. Although cases with abdominal wall adhesions experienced longer operative times than those without, there was no significant difference in estimated blood loss. In 13 cases (1.7%), adjustments in trocar placement were necessary due to abdominal wall adhesions, although none of the cases required conversion to open or conventional laparoscopic surgery. Abdominal wall adhesions pose challenges to minimally invasive procedures, emphasizing the importance of predicting these adhesions based on a patient's surgical history to safely perform robotic surgery. These results suggest that the robot's flexibility proves effective in managing abdominal wall adhesions.

摘要

本研究旨在评估既往手术导致的腹壁粘连状况及其对机器人手术结局的影响。我们回顾性分析了 2018 年 4 月至 2023 年 3 月期间在山梨中央医院接受妇科机器人手术的患者的临床资料、手术结果和腹壁粘连状况。腹壁粘连分为七个部位,并在每个部位评估其存在情况。在检查的 768 例患者中,有 196 例存在腹壁粘连。值得注意的是,有腹部手术史的患者腹壁粘连的发生率明显高于无腹部手术史的患者,但左上腹部粘连的频率无显著差异。有妇科、胃肠道或胆胰手术史的患者,其在机器人手术中通常插入套管针的脐部或上腹部更容易出现粘连。虽然有腹壁粘连的患者手术时间较长,但估计出血量无显著差异。在 13 例(1.7%)患者中,由于腹壁粘连需要调整套管针的位置,但均无需转为开腹或传统腹腔镜手术。腹壁粘连给微创手术带来挑战,强调根据患者的手术史预测这些粘连的重要性,以安全地进行机器人手术。这些结果表明,机器人的灵活性在处理腹壁粘连方面是有效的。

相似文献

1
Does the presence of abdominal wall adhesions make gynecologic robotic surgery difficult?腹壁粘连是否使妇科机器人手术变得困难?
J Robot Surg. 2024 Apr 13;18(1):173. doi: 10.1007/s11701-024-01938-2.
2
Variance in abdominal wall anatomy and port placement in women undergoing robotic gynecologic surgery.女性行机器人妇科手术时腹壁解剖和入路的差异。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Sep-Oct;17(5):583-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.04.008. Epub 2010 Jul 2.
3
Robotic partial nephrectomy in the setting of prior abdominal surgery.机器人辅助部分肾切除术在既往腹部手术中的应用。
BJU Int. 2011 Aug;108(3):413-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09803.x. Epub 2010 Dec 22.
4
Safety of Laparoscopic Entry Points in Patients With a History of Abdominal Surgery: A Research Article.有腹部手术史患者腹腔镜入路点的安全性:一篇研究文章。
Cureus. 2023 Oct 18;15(10):e47244. doi: 10.7759/cureus.47244. eCollection 2023 Oct.
5
Comparative approach for abdominal wall reconstruction after ventral hernia: open versus minimally invasive surgery.腹疝修补术后腹壁重建的比较方法:开放手术与微创手术
Hernia. 2025 Jan 20;29(1):69. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03264-4.
6
Robotic vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic myomectomy.经阴道自然腔道内镜手术机器人子宫肌瘤剔除术。
Fertil Steril. 2022 Aug;118(2):414-416. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.05.009. Epub 2022 Jun 9.
7
Advantages of robotics in benign gynecologic surgery.机器人技术在妇科良性手术中的优势。
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;28(4):304-10. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000293.
8
Laparoscopic entry: a review of techniques, technologies, and complications.腹腔镜入路:技术、科技与并发症综述
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007 May;29(5):433-447. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)35496-2.
9
Preliminary robotic abdominal wall reconstruction experience: single-centre outcomes of the first 150 cases.机器人辅助腹壁重建的初步经验:单中心前 150 例的结果。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Jul 14;408(1):276. doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03004-1.
10
Feasibility of robotic-assisted pancreatic resection in patients with previous minor abdominal surgeries: a single-center experience of the first three years.既往有腹部小手术史患者行机器人辅助胰腺切除术的可行性:单中心三年经验
BMC Surg. 2022 Mar 4;22(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12893-022-01525-y.

引用本文的文献

1
Jain Point for First Blind Trocar Insertion: Fellows' Perspective.首次盲目插入套管针的 Jain 点:学员视角。
Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2025 Mar 15;14(2):105-108. doi: 10.4103/gmit.gmit_58_24. eCollection 2025 Apr-Jun.
2
Conversion to laparotomy during laparoscopic hysterectomy: a meta-analysis of prevalence and key risk factors.腹腔镜子宫切除术中转为开腹手术:患病率及关键危险因素的荟萃分析
Front Surg. 2025 May 6;12:1522022. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1522022. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of surgical outcomes between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy for large uterus.机器人辅助与传统腹腔镜子宫切除术治疗大子宫的手术效果比较。
J Robot Surg. 2023 Oct;17(5):2415-2419. doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01673-0. Epub 2023 Jul 11.
2
Jain point laparoscopic entry in contraindications of Palmers point.在帕尔默点禁忌证情况下的 Jain 点腹腔镜入路
Front Surg. 2022 Nov 11;9:928081. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.928081. eCollection 2022.
3
The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
机器人内脏手术在粘连患者中的作用:系统评价与荟萃分析
J Pers Med. 2022 Feb 18;12(2):307. doi: 10.3390/jpm12020307.
4
Systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing gynecologic laparoscopic procedures with and without robotic assistance.系统评价和荟萃分析所有比较妇科腹腔镜手术与机器人辅助手术的随机对照试验。
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Oct;265:30-38. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.07.038. Epub 2021 Aug 11.
5
Adhesion-related readmissions after open and laparoscopic surgery: a retrospective cohort study (SCAR update).开放和腹腔镜手术后与粘连相关的再入院:一项回顾性队列研究(SCAR 更新)。
Lancet. 2020 Jan 4;395(10217):33-41. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32636-4.
6
Laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy in endometrial cancer patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of conversions and complications.腹腔镜和机器人辅助子宫切除术治疗肥胖的子宫内膜癌患者:转化和并发症的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Nov;221(5):410-428.e19. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.004. Epub 2019 May 10.
7
A comparison of operative outcomes between standard and robotic laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.标准腹腔镜手术与机器人辅助腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌的手术结局比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int J Med Robot. 2017 Dec;13(4). doi: 10.1002/rcs.1851. Epub 2017 Aug 1.
8
Differences in hand movements and task completion times between laparoscopic, robotically assisted, and open surgery: an in vitro study.腹腔镜手术、机器人辅助手术和开放手术之间手部动作及任务完成时间的差异:一项体外研究
J Robot Surg. 2011 Jun;5(2):137-40. doi: 10.1007/s11701-011-0248-9. Epub 2011 Jan 20.
9
Comparative safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统腹腔镜手术及剖腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的比较安全性和有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;42(9):1303-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.06.400. Epub 2016 Jun 29.
10
Trocar in conventional laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery as a major cause of iatrogenic trauma to the patient.传统腹腔镜手术和机器人辅助手术中的套管针是造成患者医源性创伤的主要原因。
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Aug;35:13-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.11.005. Epub 2015 Dec 1.