• 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

Unexpected difficulties in randomizing patients in a surgical trial: a prospective study comparing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy with open cholecystectomy.

作者信息

Plaisier P W, Berger M Y, van der Hul R L, Nijs H G, den Toom R, Terpstra O T, Bruining H A

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, University Hospital, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

World J Surg. 1994 Sep-Oct;18(5):769-72; discussion 773. doi: 10.1007/BF00298927.

DOI:10.1007/BF00298927
PMID:7975698
Abstract

Shortly after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was introduced as a promising new treatment modality for gallstone disease, a randomized controlled study was performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of ESWL compared to open cholecystectomy, the gold standard. During the performance of this study it was found that during a 3-year intake period only 8.3% (37 of 448) of the patients could be entered into the trial. Three factors were identified that hampered patient accrual: (1) restricted eligibility for ESWL (and thus for the study), which could not have been predicted on the data provided in the literature; (2) the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy; and (3) strong patient preference, inhibiting randomization. All three mechanisms could not have been predicted during the design phase of the study. It is concluded that it is not always feasible to conduct a randomized study in surgery due to unforeseen circumstances. Entering patients into surgical trials is difficult in quickly evolving fields of surgery, such as the management of gallstone disease. Acquiring informed consent is also difficult when treatment characteristics are divergent. A randomized controlled study on the effects of laparoscopic cholecystectomy will therefore probably never be performed.

摘要

相似文献

1
Unexpected difficulties in randomizing patients in a surgical trial: a prospective study comparing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy with open cholecystectomy.
World J Surg. 1994 Sep-Oct;18(5):769-72; discussion 773. doi: 10.1007/BF00298927.
2
The pros and cons of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the management of gallstone disease.腹腔镜胆囊切除术与体外冲击波碎石术在胆结石疾病治疗中的利弊。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1994 Jan;76(1):42-6.
3
Symptomatic gallbladder stones. Cost-effectiveness of treatment with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy, conventional and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.有症状的胆囊结石。体外冲击波碎石术、传统开腹胆囊切除术和腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗的成本效益。
Surg Endosc. 1995 Jan;9(1):37-41. doi: 10.1007/BF00187882.
4
The course of biliary and gastrointestinal symptoms after treatment of uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones: results of a randomized study comparing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy with conventional cholecystectomy.单纯症状性胆结石治疗后胆道和胃肠道症状的病程:一项比较体外冲击波碎石术与传统胆囊切除术的随机研究结果
Am J Gastroenterol. 1994 May;89(5):739-44.
5
Cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy versus cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones.体外冲击波碎石术与胆囊切除术治疗有症状胆结石的成本效益分析
Gastroenterology. 1991 Jul;101(1):189-99. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(91)90477-3.
6
Costs and effectiveness of extracorporeal gallbladder stone shock wave lithotripsy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A randomized clinical trial. McGill Gallstone Treatment Group.体外冲击波碎石术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术的成本及效果:一项随机临床试验。麦吉尔胆结石治疗组
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997 Fall;13(4):589-601. doi: 10.1017/s0266462300010060.
7
Physical characteristics of gallstones removed at cholecystectomy: implications for extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy.胆囊切除术中取出的胆结石的物理特征:对体外冲击波碎石术的影响。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988 Nov;151(5):927-31. doi: 10.2214/ajr.151.5.927.
8
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy after unsuccessful shock-wave therapy.冲击波治疗失败后行腹腔镜胆囊切除术。
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1992 Sep;2(3):217-20.
9
Combined extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.体外冲击波碎石术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术联合应用
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991 Dec;1(4):233-5.
10
[Does the lithotripter change gallstone surgery?].[碎石机是否改变胆结石手术?]
Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl II Verh Dtsch Ges Chir. 1989:351-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Factors affecting patient participation in orthopaedic trials comparing surgery to non-surgical interventions.影响患者参与比较手术与非手术干预的骨科试验的因素。
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2016 May 13;3:153-157. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2016.05.007. eCollection 2016 Aug 15.
2
Factors influencing women's decision to participate or not in a surgical randomised controlled trial for surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence.影响女性参与或不参与女性压力性尿失禁手术治疗的随机对照试验的因素。
Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:139813. doi: 10.1155/2013/139813. Epub 2013 Sep 17.
3
Why don't women participate? A qualitative study on non-participation in a surgical randomised controlled trial.

本文引用的文献

1
Summary of NIH Consensus development conference "gallstones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy".美国国立卫生研究院关于“胆结石与腹腔镜胆囊切除术”的共识发展会议总结
World J Surg. 1993 Jan-Feb;17(1):21. doi: 10.1007/BF01655699.
2
Pitfalls in randomized surgical trials.随机外科试验中的陷阱。
Surgery. 1980 Mar;87(3):258-62.
3
Patients' preferences in randomized clinical trials.随机临床试验中患者的偏好
女性为何不参与?一项关于不参与外科随机对照试验的定性研究。
Int Urogynecol J. 2013 Jun;24(6):969-75. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1967-9. Epub 2012 Nov 1.
4
Do surgical trials meet the scientific standards for clinical trials?外科手术试验是否符合临床试验的科学标准?
J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Nov;215(5):722-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.06.018. Epub 2012 Jul 21.
5
Laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease has no advantages over open approach: midterm results of a randomized controlled trial.腹腔镜乙状结肠切除术治疗憩室病与开放手术相比没有优势:一项随机对照试验的中期结果。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2011 Oct;396(7):973-80. doi: 10.1007/s00423-011-0825-4. Epub 2011 Jul 16.
6
Problems of randomization to open or laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease.随机分组行开腹或腹腔镜乙状结肠切除术治疗憩室病的问题。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011 Mar;26(3):369-75. doi: 10.1007/s00384-010-1074-7. Epub 2010 Oct 17.
N Engl J Med. 1984 May 24;310(21):1385-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198405243102111.
4
Shock-wave lithotripsy of gallbladder stones. The first 175 patients.胆囊结石的冲击波碎石术。首批175例患者。
N Engl J Med. 1988 Feb 18;318(7):393-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198802183180701.
5
The promise of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for the treatment of gallstones.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1987 Aug;149(2):233-5. doi: 10.2214/ajr.149.2.233.
6
The randomised controlled trial in the evaluation of new technology: a case study.新技术评估中的随机对照试验:一个案例研究
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986 Mar 29;292(6524):877-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.292.6524.877.
7
Stones, lithotripters, trials, and arguments.结石、碎石机、试验与争论。
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986 Mar 29;292(6524):846-7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.292.6524.846.
8
Breast cancer therapy: exercising all our options.
N Engl J Med. 1989 Feb 23;320(8):527-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198902233200812.
9
Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy of gallstones. Possibilities and limitations.胆结石的体外冲击波碎石术。可能性与局限性。
Ann Surg. 1989 Nov;210(5):565-75. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198911000-00001.
10
Cholecystectomy: the gold standard.胆囊切除术:金标准。
Am J Surg. 1989 Sep;158(3):174-8. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(89)90246-8.