Mihetiu Alin, Bratu Dan, Neamtu Bogdan, Sabau Dan, Sandu Alexandra
County Clinical Emergency Hospital of Sibiu, 550245 Sibiu, Romania.
Faculty of Medicine, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, 550169 Sibiu, Romania.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Jun 30;14(13):1399. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14131399.
Hydatid disease is endemic in certain geographical areas where animal breeding is common, frequently challenging the medical services in these regions. Hydatid cysts most often affect the liver, with damage to other organs accounting for around one-third of the total cases. The alternative to interventional or pharmacological approaches is surgical treatment, available in variants such as laparoscopy, laparoscopy with special instruments for hydatid disease, or open surgery. This article aims to analyze the outcomes of these three types of surgical approaches, considering preoperative indications, operative techniques and efficiency, and immediate and long-term postoperative results. A total of 149 patients from two different surgical units were analyzed over a period of seven years. It was observed that males were more affected by this pathology (53.02%), with the majority of patients coming from rural areas (62.42%). The distribution by surgical procedure type showed that 50.34% were operated on using open surgery, 33.56% by means of a laparoscopic approach with the usual instruments, and 16.11% by means of a laparoscopic approach with special instruments. The laparoscopic procedure with special instruments presented a lower rate of conversion to open surgery compared to the usual laparoscopic approach ( = 0.014). The analysis of the average operative duration revealed statistically significant differences between the three types of surgical techniques ( < 0.05), noting that interventions with specialized instruments had the shortest duration, while open surgery had the longest operative time (72.5 ± 27.23 min vs. 154 ± 52.04 min). In terms of intraoperative complications, they were documented in 8.34% of cases for the group operated on with special instruments, in 12.24% of cases for the standard laparoscopy group, and in 16% of cases for the open surgery group. Maximal cystectomy was the preferred method for resolving these cysts using minimally invasive surgery ( < 0.001), while Lagrot pericystectomy was preferred in the open approach ( < 0.001). The most frequent postoperative complication was biliary fistula (24.16%), encountered in varying percentages across each technique but without significant statistical difference ( > 0.05). Open surgery was associated with a longer length of hospitalization compared to minimally invasive procedures ( < 0.05), a higher number of late postoperative complications ( = 0.002), and a significantly higher number of recurrences ( < 0.001) compared to the other two techniques. The present study highlights the effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery for hydatid cysts as a safe alternative with fewer complications and superior results compared to open surgery. Additionally, it provides a comparative analysis of these surgical approaches (special instruments, standard laparoscopy, and open surgery) to hydatid disease for the first time. Under the circumstances where pharmacological treatment is recommended as a supportive measure before and after procedures, and using medication alone as the primary treatment option shows only modest efficacy, there is a necessity to consider invasive treatment methods. Percutaneous procedures represent the least invasive form of treatment, yielding results comparable to surgery in terms of efficacy. However, their effectiveness is influenced by factors such as the cyst's stage of development, its location, and the challenges in achieving complete intra-procedural isolation. Laparoscopy, particularly when using specialized instruments tailored to the tactical and technical demands of managing hydatid disease, serves to address the limitations of percutaneous methods. Open surgery's role is increasingly restricted, primarily serving as a fallback option in laparoscopic procedures or in cases complicated by hydatid disease. In conclusion, despite the rising popularity of percutaneous methods, surgery remains a viable therapeutic option for treating hydatid disease. Minimally invasive surgical interventions are increasingly versatile and yield comparable outcomes, further solidifying the role of surgery in its management.
包虫病在某些动物养殖常见的地理区域呈地方性流行,经常给这些地区的医疗服务带来挑战。包虫囊肿最常累及肝脏,其他器官受损约占总病例的三分之一。介入或药物治疗方法之外的选择是手术治疗,有多种术式可供选择,如腹腔镜手术、使用包虫病专用器械的腹腔镜手术或开放手术。本文旨在分析这三种手术方式的疗效,考虑术前指征、手术技术及效率以及术后近期和远期结果。在七年时间里,对来自两个不同手术科室的149例患者进行了分析。观察发现,男性受这种疾病影响更大(53.02%),大多数患者来自农村地区(62.42%)。按手术方式类型分布显示,50.34%的患者接受了开放手术,33.56%的患者通过使用常规器械的腹腔镜手术进行治疗,16.11%的患者采用了使用专用器械的腹腔镜手术。与常规腹腔镜手术相比,使用专用器械的腹腔镜手术转为开放手术的比例较低( = 0.014)。对平均手术时长的分析显示,三种手术技术之间存在统计学显著差异( < 0.05),注意到使用专用器械的手术持续时间最短,而开放手术的手术时间最长(72.5 ± 27.23分钟 vs. 154 ± 操作52.04分钟)。在术中并发症方面,使用专用器械手术组有8.34%的病例记录有并发症,标准腹腔镜手术组为12.24%,开放手术组为16%。在微创手术中,最大囊肿切除术是处理这些囊肿的首选方法( < 0.001),而在开放手术中,Lagrot囊外切除术是首选( < 0.001)。最常见的术后并发症是胆瘘(24.16%),在每种技术中发生率不同,但无显著统计学差异( > 0.05)。与微创手术相比,开放手术的住院时间更长( < 0.05),术后晚期并发症数量更多( = 0.002),复发率显著更高( < 0.001)。本研究强调了微创手术治疗包虫囊肿的有效性,作为一种安全的替代方法,与开放手术相比并发症更少且效果更好。此外,它首次对这些手术方式(专用器械、标准腹腔镜手术和开放手术)治疗包虫病进行了比较分析。在推荐药物治疗作为手术前后支持措施的情况下,且单独使用药物作为主要治疗选择疗效有限,有必要考虑侵入性治疗方法。经皮手术是侵入性最小的治疗形式,在疗效方面与手术相当。然而,其有效性受囊肿发育阶段、位置以及术中实现完全隔离的挑战等因素影响。腹腔镜手术,特别是使用针对包虫病管理的战术和技术需求定制的专用器械时,有助于解决经皮方法的局限性。开放手术的作用越来越受限,主要作为腹腔镜手术或包虫病复杂病例中的备用选择。总之,尽管经皮方法越来越受欢迎,但手术仍然是治疗包虫病的可行治疗选择。微创外科手术干预越来越多样化且疗效相当,进一步巩固了手术在其管理中的作用。