Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎:真的有任何益处吗?

Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: is there really any benefit?

作者信息

Schroder D M, Lathrop J C, Lloyd L R, Boccaccio J E, Hawasli A

机构信息

St. John Hospital, Detroit, Michigan.

出版信息

Am Surg. 1993 Aug;59(8):541-7; discussion 547-8.

PMID:8338286
Abstract

Laparoscopic appendectomy is emerging as a popular treatment modality for acute appendicitis. Although claims have been made to potential superiority over traditional appendectomy, comparisons of operative difficulty, hospital stay, hospital costs, complication rates, postoperative pain, and convalescence have not been well studied. Two hundred consecutive patients presenting with signs and symptoms of acute appendicitis underwent appendectomy. Traditional appendectomy was employed in 101 patients, while 99 underwent laparoscopy. Successful laparoscopic appendectomy was possible in 89 patients who were compared with the 101 patients with traditional appendectomy. There were two pregnant patients with appendicitis in each group. The incidence of acute appendicitis was 72 per cent for traditional appendectomy and 74 per cent for laparoscopic appendectomy. Operating time was significantly longer with laparoscopic appendectomy (60.1 vs 45.4 minutes, P = 0.0001). This was reflected in higher (although not significant) hospital costs ($8,683 vs $6,213). Post-op hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopic appendectomy (2.7 vs 3.8 days, P = 0.001). Complication rates were no different between the two groups. Post-op pain, as evaluated by a patient grading scale, was less for laparoscopic appendectomies up to the third post-op week (P = 0.003). The amount of IM pain medication was greater with traditional appendectomy (P = 0.009). Convalescence was significantly shorter with laparoscopic appendectomy as measured by: 1) return to normal household activity (7.8 vs 13.2 days, P = 0.016), 2) returned ability to exercise (19.7 vs 29.0 days, P = 0.009), 3) patient feeling well enough to return to work (14.1 vs 19.2 days, P = 0.032), and 4) actual return to work (15.4 vs 20.5 days, P = 0.038).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

腹腔镜阑尾切除术正逐渐成为治疗急性阑尾炎的一种流行术式。尽管有人宣称其可能优于传统阑尾切除术,但在手术难度、住院时间、住院费用、并发症发生率、术后疼痛及康复情况等方面的比较研究尚不充分。连续200例出现急性阑尾炎体征和症状的患者接受了阑尾切除术。101例患者采用传统阑尾切除术,99例接受腹腔镜手术。89例成功实施腹腔镜阑尾切除术的患者与101例接受传统阑尾切除术的患者进行了比较。每组各有2例阑尾炎孕妇。传统阑尾切除术的急性阑尾炎发病率为72%,腹腔镜阑尾切除术为74%。腹腔镜阑尾切除术的手术时间明显更长(60.1分钟对45.4分钟,P = 0.0001)。这反映在较高(虽不显著)的住院费用上(8683美元对6213美元)。腹腔镜阑尾切除术的术后住院时间更短(2.7天对3.8天,P = 0.001)。两组的并发症发生率无差异。根据患者分级量表评估,腹腔镜阑尾切除术在术后第三周内的术后疼痛较轻(P = 0.003)。传统阑尾切除术的肌肉注射止痛药物用量更大(P = 0.009)。通过以下指标衡量,腹腔镜阑尾切除术的康复时间明显更短:1)恢复正常家庭活动(7.8天对13.2天,P = 0.016),2)恢复运动能力(19.7天对29.0天,P = 0.009),3)患者感觉身体状况良好可恢复工作(14.1天对19.2天,P = 0.032),4)实际恢复工作(15.4天对20.5天,P = 0.038)。(摘要截取自250字)

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