The efficacy and safety of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery vs. conventional five-port laparoscopic surgery for duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection.

IF 1.5 3区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Gland surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-31 Epub Date: 2024-08-28 DOI:10.21037/gs-24-200
Bangyou Zuo, Xinyu You, Jipeng Jiang, Donghui Cheng, Peng Li, Chong Yang, Yu Zhang
{"title":"The efficacy and safety of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery <i>vs.</i> conventional five-port laparoscopic surgery for duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection.","authors":"Bangyou Zuo, Xinyu You, Jipeng Jiang, Donghui Cheng, Peng Li, Chong Yang, Yu Zhang","doi":"10.21037/gs-24-200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (SILDPPHR+1) is yet to be reported, and therefore, its safety and efficacy have yet to be established. This study aimed to assess the short-term efficacy of SILDPPHR+1 in comparison to conventional laparoscopic duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (cLDPPHR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive patients who underwent SILDPPHR+1 and cLDPPHR procedures were screened. An analysis of the intraoperative and postoperative data of all patients was carried out.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen patients who underwent SILDPPHR+1 and 24 patients who underwent cLDPPHR at Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital from October 15, 2021, to October 30, 2023, were enrolled in this study. All baseline parameters of both groups were comparable. There was a statistically significant difference in the cosmetic score between the groups (P<0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding postoperative recovery, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), bile leakage rate, delayed gastric emptying (DGE) rate, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) rate, abdominal infection rate, or textbook outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SILDPPHR+1 appears to be a reliable and safe procedure for certain patients, with no increase in the operating time or complications, similar to the results of cLDPPHR. Moreover, SILDPPHR+1 offers the added advantage of superior cosmetic results.</p>","PeriodicalId":12760,"journal":{"name":"Gland surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11399006/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gland surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-24-200","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (SILDPPHR+1) is yet to be reported, and therefore, its safety and efficacy have yet to be established. This study aimed to assess the short-term efficacy of SILDPPHR+1 in comparison to conventional laparoscopic duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (cLDPPHR).

Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent SILDPPHR+1 and cLDPPHR procedures were screened. An analysis of the intraoperative and postoperative data of all patients was carried out.

Results: Nineteen patients who underwent SILDPPHR+1 and 24 patients who underwent cLDPPHR at Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital from October 15, 2021, to October 30, 2023, were enrolled in this study. All baseline parameters of both groups were comparable. There was a statistically significant difference in the cosmetic score between the groups (P<0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding postoperative recovery, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), bile leakage rate, delayed gastric emptying (DGE) rate, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) rate, abdominal infection rate, or textbook outcomes.

Conclusions: SILDPPHR+1 appears to be a reliable and safe procedure for certain patients, with no increase in the operating time or complications, similar to the results of cLDPPHR. Moreover, SILDPPHR+1 offers the added advantage of superior cosmetic results.

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
在保留十二指肠的胰头切除术中,单切口加单孔腹腔镜手术与传统五孔腹腔镜手术的有效性和安全性对比。
背景:单切口加单孔腹腔镜十二指肠保留胰头切除术(SILDPPHR+1)尚未见报道,因此其安全性和有效性尚未确定。本研究旨在评估 SILDPPHR+1 与传统腹腔镜十二指肠保留胰头切除术(cLDPPHR)相比的短期疗效:方法: 筛选了接受 SILDPPHR+1 和 cLDPPHR 手术的连续患者。对所有患者的术中和术后数据进行了分析:研究纳入了 2021 年 10 月 15 日至 2023 年 10 月 30 日期间在四川省人民医院接受 SILDPPHR+1 手术的 19 例患者和接受 cLDPPHR 手术的 24 例患者。两组患者的所有基线参数具有可比性。两组患者的美容评分差异有统计学意义(PC结论:SILDPPHR+1组的美容评分与SILDPPHR+2组的美容评分差异无统计学意义:对于某些患者来说,SILDPPHR+1 似乎是一种可靠而安全的手术,手术时间和并发症都没有增加,与 cLDPPHR 的结果相似。此外,SILDPPHR+1 还具有美容效果更佳的优势。
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
Gland surgery
Gland surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
113
期刊介绍: Gland Surgery (Gland Surg; GS, Print ISSN 2227-684X; Online ISSN 2227-8575) being indexed by PubMed/PubMed Central, is an open access, peer-review journal launched at May of 2012, published bio-monthly since February 2015.
期刊最新文献
Cardiovascular and fracture events analysis and intervention strategies in patients undergoing parathyroidectomy with secondary hyperparathyroidism. Centralization of adrenal surgeries and improved surgeon volume outcomes. Computed tomography-based radiomics and body composition analysis for predicting clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Early detection of concomitant pancreatic cancer during intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms surveillance. Impact of location and size of minimal extrathyroidal extension on lymph node metastasis in papillary thyroid cancer: a retrospective analysis.
×
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