Shea J A, Healey M J, Berlin J A, Clarke J R, Malet P F, Staroscik R N, Schwartz J S, Williams S V
Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
Ann Surg. 1996 Nov;224(5):609-20. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199611000-00005.
The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of large laparoscopic cholecystectomy case-series and compare results concerning complications, particularly bile duct injury, to those reported in open cholecystectomy case-series.
Since the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the United States, hundreds of reports about the technique have been published, many including statements about the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with those of open cholecystectomy. There is an unevenness in scope and quality of the studies. Nevertheless, enough data have accumulated from large series to permit analyses of data regarding some of the most important issues.
Articles identified via a MEDLINE (the National Library of Medicine's computerized database) search were evaluated according to standard criteria. Data regarding the patient sample, study methods, and outcomes of cholecystectomy were abstracted and summarized across studies.
Outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy are examined for 78,747 patients reported on in 98 studies and compared with outcomes of open cholecystectomy for 12,973 patients reported on in 28 studies. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy appears to have a higher common bile duct injury rate and a lower mortality rate. Estimated rates of other types of complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy generally were low. Most conversions followed operative discoveries (e.g., dense adhesions) and were not the result of injury.
There is wide variability in the amount and type of data reported within any single study, and patient populations may not be comparable across studies. Except for a higher common bile duct injury rate, laparoscopic cholecystectomy appears to be at least as safe a procedure as that of open cholecystectomy.
本研究旨在对大型腹腔镜胆囊切除术病例系列进行荟萃分析,并将并发症尤其是胆管损伤的结果与开放胆囊切除术病例系列报告的结果进行比较。
自腹腔镜胆囊切除术在美国引入以来,已发表了数百篇关于该技术的报告,其中许多包括腹腔镜胆囊切除术与开放胆囊切除术相比的优势陈述。研究的范围和质量参差不齐。然而,从大型系列中已经积累了足够的数据,以便对一些最重要问题的数据进行分析。
根据标准标准对通过MEDLINE(美国国立医学图书馆的计算机数据库)搜索确定的文章进行评估。跨研究提取并总结了有关患者样本、研究方法和胆囊切除术结果的数据。
对98项研究报告的78747例患者的腹腔镜胆囊切除术结果进行了检查,并与28项研究报告的12973例患者的开放胆囊切除术结果进行了比较。腹腔镜胆囊切除术似乎有较高的胆总管损伤率和较低的死亡率。腹腔镜胆囊切除术后其他类型并发症的估计发生率一般较低。大多数中转手术是由于术中发现(如致密粘连),而非损伤所致。
任何一项研究中报告的数据数量和类型差异很大,且不同研究中的患者群体可能不可比。除了较高的胆总管损伤率外,腹腔镜胆囊切除术似乎至少与开放胆囊切除术一样安全。