腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术与全腹腔镜远端胃切除术比洛斯I型治疗胃癌的手术效果。

Ahmed Motamiez, Doaa Maximous, Ahmed A S Salem, Badawy M Ahmed, Seong-Ho Kong, Do Joong Park, Hyuk-Joon Lee, Han-Kwang Yang
{"title":"腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术与全腹腔镜远端胃切除术比洛斯I型治疗胃癌的手术效果。","authors":"Ahmed Motamiez, Doaa Maximous, Ahmed A S Salem, Badawy M Ahmed, Seong-Ho Kong, Do Joong Park, Hyuk-Joon Lee, Han-Kwang Yang","doi":"10.1097/SLE.0000000000001255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study aimed to compare intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy versus totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) Billroth I (BI) for gastric cancer and to assess the impact of the initial introduction phase of TLDG BI anastomosis.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The study analyzed the prospectively collected data of patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy BI from 2014 to 2021 at Seoul National University Hospital.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1116 patients, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy BI was performed in 566 patients and TLDG BI was performed in 550 patients. The total laparoscopic arm had a faster mean operative time (190 vs 208 min; P < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (7.4 vs 7.9 d; P < 0.001). Local complications were higher in the total laparoscopic group (17.6% vs 9.9%; P = 0.008) during the early introduction phase.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The total laparoscopic approach for BI reconstruction is safe and effective with faster operative time, shorter hospital stays, and less wound infection, but it may be associated with an increase in postoperative surgical complications and hospital stay in the early introduction phase.</p>","PeriodicalId":22092,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","volume":" ","pages":"80-86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic-assisted Distal Gastrectomy Versus Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy Billroth I for Gastric Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Motamiez, Doaa Maximous, Ahmed A S Salem, Badawy M Ahmed, Seong-Ho Kong, Do Joong Park, Hyuk-Joon Lee, Han-Kwang Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SLE.0000000000001255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study aimed to compare intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy versus totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) Billroth I (BI) for gastric cancer and to assess the impact of the initial introduction phase of TLDG BI anastomosis.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The study analyzed the prospectively collected data of patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy BI from 2014 to 2021 at Seoul National University Hospital.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1116 patients, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy BI was performed in 566 patients and TLDG BI was performed in 550 patients. The total laparoscopic arm had a faster mean operative time (190 vs 208 min; P < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (7.4 vs 7.9 d; P < 0.001). Local complications were higher in the total laparoscopic group (17.6% vs 9.9%; P = 0.008) during the early introduction phase.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The total laparoscopic approach for BI reconstruction is safe and effective with faster operative time, shorter hospital stays, and less wound infection, but it may be associated with an increase in postoperative surgical complications and hospital stay in the early introduction phase.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"80-86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000001255\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000001255","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在比较腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术与全腹腔镜远端胃切除术(TLDG)Billroth I(BI)治疗胃癌的术中和术后效果,并评估TLDG BI吻合术初始导入阶段的影响:研究分析了2014年至2021年在首尔大学医院接受腹腔镜远端胃切除术BI的患者的前瞻性数据:在1116名患者中,566名患者接受了腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术,550名患者接受了TLDG远端胃切除术。全腹腔镜手术组的平均手术时间更短(190 分钟对 208 分钟;P < 0.001),术后住院时间更短(7.4 天对 7.9 天;P < 0.001)。在早期引入阶段,全腹腔镜组的局部并发症较高(17.6% vs 9.9%; P = 0.008):结论:全腹腔镜方法用于 BI 重建安全有效,手术时间更快,住院时间更短,伤口感染更少,但在早期引入阶段可能会增加术后并发症和住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic-assisted Distal Gastrectomy Versus Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy Billroth I for Gastric Cancer.

Objective: The present study aimed to compare intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy versus totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) Billroth I (BI) for gastric cancer and to assess the impact of the initial introduction phase of TLDG BI anastomosis.

Patients and methods: The study analyzed the prospectively collected data of patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy BI from 2014 to 2021 at Seoul National University Hospital.

Results: Among 1116 patients, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy BI was performed in 566 patients and TLDG BI was performed in 550 patients. The total laparoscopic arm had a faster mean operative time (190 vs 208 min; P < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (7.4 vs 7.9 d; P < 0.001). Local complications were higher in the total laparoscopic group (17.6% vs 9.9%; P = 0.008) during the early introduction phase.

Conclusion: The total laparoscopic approach for BI reconstruction is safe and effective with faster operative time, shorter hospital stays, and less wound infection, but it may be associated with an increase in postoperative surgical complications and hospital stay in the early introduction phase.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
103
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques is a primary source for peer-reviewed, original articles on the newest techniques and applications in operative laparoscopy and endoscopy. Its Editorial Board includes many of the surgeons who pioneered the use of these revolutionary techniques. The journal provides complete, timely, accurate, practical coverage of laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques and procedures; current clinical and basic science research; preoperative and postoperative patient management; complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery; and new developments in instrumentation and technology.
期刊最新文献
How I Do It: Simplified Transcystic Antegrade-only Robotic Common Bile Duct Exploration (RCBDE). Single-dock Robotic Bilateral Transversus Abdominis Release: Technique Description and Preliminary Outcomes. Erector Spinae Plane Block for Pain Management in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Left Hemihepatectomy: A Retrospective Propensity Score-matched Study. Rectal Eversion as an Anus-sparing Technique in Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection With Double Stapling Anastomosis: Long-term Functional Results. Single-port Thoracoscopic Laser Sympathicotomy for Primary Hyperhidrosis: A Safe and Minimally Invasive Approach With Favorable Short-term Outcomes.
×
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