Using Three-Dimensional versus Two–Dimensional Laparoscopy in Sleeve Gastrectomy: A case matched comparison

IF 0.2 Q4 SURGERY Formosan Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.1097/fs9.0000000000000100
Lung-Yun Kang, Wei-Jei Lee, Sheng-Shih Chen
{"title":"Using Three-Dimensional versus Two–Dimensional Laparoscopy in Sleeve Gastrectomy: A case matched comparison","authors":"Lung-Yun Kang, Wei-Jei Lee, Sheng-Shih Chen","doi":"10.1097/fs9.0000000000000100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy using two-dimensional (2-D) systems has been proven to be a safe and effective treatment for obesity. Three-dimensional (3-D) systems have recently been introduced in the general field. We hypothesized that using a 3-D system offers more benefits than using 2-D laparoscopy in sleeve gastrectomy. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) without any other surgeries between January 1st, 2017, and February 28th, 2019, were included. Characteristic factors and outcomes were reviewed and compared between the groups using the 2-D system and the 3-D system, including sex, age, length of stay (LOS), body mass index (BMI), operative time, blood loss, morbidity, total body weight loss, and excess weight loss. Results Seventy-five patients underwent LSG and were included in the study. Among them, forty-two patients used the 3-D system, while thirty-three patients used the 2-D system. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of basic characteristics, including age, sex, and BMI. The morbidity rate did not differ, but the 3-D group experienced less blood loss (25.12 ml vs. 47.27 ml; p = 0.001) and shorter operative times (105.93 ± 30.645 mins vs. 128.94 ± 28.566 mins; p = 0.001) compared to the 2-D group (25.12 ml vs. 47.27 ml; p = 0.001). Weight loss at 6 months was similar between the two groups. Conclusion In conclusion, 3-D LSG shows promise in reducing both blood loss and operative time. Nevertheless, further prospective trials are essential to definitively establish its efficacy.","PeriodicalId":12390,"journal":{"name":"Formosan Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Formosan Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/fs9.0000000000000100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy using two-dimensional (2-D) systems has been proven to be a safe and effective treatment for obesity. Three-dimensional (3-D) systems have recently been introduced in the general field. We hypothesized that using a 3-D system offers more benefits than using 2-D laparoscopy in sleeve gastrectomy. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) without any other surgeries between January 1st, 2017, and February 28th, 2019, were included. Characteristic factors and outcomes were reviewed and compared between the groups using the 2-D system and the 3-D system, including sex, age, length of stay (LOS), body mass index (BMI), operative time, blood loss, morbidity, total body weight loss, and excess weight loss. Results Seventy-five patients underwent LSG and were included in the study. Among them, forty-two patients used the 3-D system, while thirty-three patients used the 2-D system. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of basic characteristics, including age, sex, and BMI. The morbidity rate did not differ, but the 3-D group experienced less blood loss (25.12 ml vs. 47.27 ml; p = 0.001) and shorter operative times (105.93 ± 30.645 mins vs. 128.94 ± 28.566 mins; p = 0.001) compared to the 2-D group (25.12 ml vs. 47.27 ml; p = 0.001). Weight loss at 6 months was similar between the two groups. Conclusion In conclusion, 3-D LSG shows promise in reducing both blood loss and operative time. Nevertheless, further prospective trials are essential to definitively establish its efficacy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
三维与二维腹腔镜在袖式胃切除术中的应用:一例匹配比较
背景使用二维(2-D)系统的腹腔镜袖胃切除术已被证明是一种安全有效的治疗肥胖的方法。三维(3-D)系统最近被引入到一般领域。我们假设使用三维系统比使用二维腹腔镜在袖式胃切除术中提供更多的好处。方法选取2017年1月1日至2019年2月28日期间行腹腔镜袖胃切除术(LSG)且未进行其他手术的患者。对使用二维系统和三维系统的两组患者的特征因素和结果进行回顾和比较,包括性别、年龄、住院时间(LOS)、体重指数(BMI)、手术时间、出血量、发病率、总体重减轻和超重减轻。结果75例患者行LSG,纳入研究。其中使用3-D系统的患者42例,使用2-D系统的患者33例。两组在基本特征(包括年龄、性别和BMI)方面没有显著差异。发病率无差异,但3d组出血量较少(25.12 ml vs 47.27 ml;P = 0.001)和较短的手术时间(105.93±30.645 min vs 128.94±28.566 min;p = 0.001),与2d组相比(25.12 ml vs 47.27 ml;P = 0.001)。6个月后,两组的体重下降情况相似。结论三维LSG在减少出血量和缩短手术时间方面具有良好的应用前景。然而,进一步的前瞻性试验对于确定其有效性是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Formosan Journal of Surgery, a publication of Taiwan Surgical Association, is a peer-reviewed online journal with Bimonthly print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.e-fjs.org. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository.
期刊最新文献
Urethral Pseudodiverticulum with Left-Sided Non-Functioning Kidney: Case Report Upholding Ethical Standards in Post-Publication Interactions: A Call to Action Efficacy and Safety of Extended-Release Dinalbuphine Sebacate for Postoperative Analgesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Infected Urachal Cyst with Urethral Stricture Disease presenting with intraperitoneal perforation of cyst and pyoperitoneum AI-powered medicine is being repurposed to find novel surgical infection cures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1