全腹腔镜子宫切除术后的阴道穹窿封闭:腹腔镜与传统技术的比较研究。

IF 1.4 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT Pub Date : 2023-12-07 eCollection Date: 2024-04-01 DOI:10.4103/gmit.gmit_8_23
Mukta Agarwal, Shivangni Sinha, Smita Singh, H Haripriya, S Simran
{"title":"全腹腔镜子宫切除术后的阴道穹窿封闭:腹腔镜与传统技术的比较研究。","authors":"Mukta Agarwal, Shivangni Sinha, Smita Singh, H Haripriya, S Simran","doi":"10.4103/gmit.gmit_8_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Vault closure is the final step to hysterectomy, protecting the abdominal cavity from the exterior environment. Thus, closure becomes crucial in preventing ascend of infection to the peritoneal cavity. Our study aims to compare vault closure between laparoscopic and vaginal routes, their operating time, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The ambispective comparative study was done in a tertiary care teaching center from June 2016 to December 2022. Three hundred and forty-four patients were included in the study that underwent a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Interventions - Patients who had laparoscopic vault closure were in Group 1 (<i>N</i> = 198) and those who had vaginal closure were in Group 2 (<i>N</i> = 146). The results were compared. It included age, body mass index of the patient, the indication of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, size of the uterus, time taken during vault closure, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The time taken by laparoscopic vault repair was significantly less than vaginal repair (19.7 ± 13.3 min vs. 30.1 ± 6.6 min, <i>P</i> < 0.001). There was postoperative vault infection (2.7%), vault hematoma (1.3%), and no vault prolapse seen in vaginal repair. The organisms isolated were mainly <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i>, <i>Escherichia coli</i>, and <i>Klebsiella</i>.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laparoscopic vault closure has shown significantly improved results compared to vaginal route repair.</p>","PeriodicalId":45272,"journal":{"name":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","volume":"13 2","pages":"90-94"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11192275/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vaginal Vault Closure Following Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Laparoscopic versus Conventional Technique - A Comparative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Mukta Agarwal, Shivangni Sinha, Smita Singh, H Haripriya, S Simran\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/gmit.gmit_8_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Vault closure is the final step to hysterectomy, protecting the abdominal cavity from the exterior environment. Thus, closure becomes crucial in preventing ascend of infection to the peritoneal cavity. Our study aims to compare vault closure between laparoscopic and vaginal routes, their operating time, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The ambispective comparative study was done in a tertiary care teaching center from June 2016 to December 2022. Three hundred and forty-four patients were included in the study that underwent a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Interventions - Patients who had laparoscopic vault closure were in Group 1 (<i>N</i> = 198) and those who had vaginal closure were in Group 2 (<i>N</i> = 146). The results were compared. It included age, body mass index of the patient, the indication of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, size of the uterus, time taken during vault closure, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The time taken by laparoscopic vault repair was significantly less than vaginal repair (19.7 ± 13.3 min vs. 30.1 ± 6.6 min, <i>P</i> < 0.001). There was postoperative vault infection (2.7%), vault hematoma (1.3%), and no vault prolapse seen in vaginal repair. The organisms isolated were mainly <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i>, <i>Escherichia coli</i>, and <i>Klebsiella</i>.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laparoscopic vault closure has shown significantly improved results compared to vaginal route repair.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT\",\"volume\":\"13 2\",\"pages\":\"90-94\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11192275/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/gmit.gmit_8_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/gmit.gmit_8_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:穹隆关闭是子宫切除术的最后一步,可保护腹腔不受外部环境的影响。因此,闭合穹隆对于防止腹腔感染至关重要。我们的研究旨在比较腹腔镜和阴道两种途径的穹窿闭合、手术时间和术后并发症:这项前瞻性比较研究于 2016 年 6 月至 2022 年 12 月在一家三级医疗教学中心进行。研究纳入了344名接受全腹腔镜子宫切除术的患者。干预措施 - 采用腹腔镜穹隆闭合术的患者为第一组(N = 198),采用阴道闭合术的患者为第二组(N = 146)。对结果进行了比较。结果:结果:腹腔镜穹窿修补术所用时间明显少于阴道修补术(19.7 ± 13.3 分钟对 30.1 ± 6.6 分钟,P < 0.001)。阴道修复术后出现穹窿感染(2.7%)、穹窿血肿(1.3%),但未发现穹窿脱垂。分离出的微生物主要是铜绿假单胞菌、大肠埃希菌和克雷伯菌:结论:腹腔镜穹窿闭合术的效果明显优于阴道修复术。
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
Vaginal Vault Closure Following Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Laparoscopic versus Conventional Technique - A Comparative Study.

Objectives: Vault closure is the final step to hysterectomy, protecting the abdominal cavity from the exterior environment. Thus, closure becomes crucial in preventing ascend of infection to the peritoneal cavity. Our study aims to compare vault closure between laparoscopic and vaginal routes, their operating time, and postoperative complications.

Materials and methods: The ambispective comparative study was done in a tertiary care teaching center from June 2016 to December 2022. Three hundred and forty-four patients were included in the study that underwent a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Interventions - Patients who had laparoscopic vault closure were in Group 1 (N = 198) and those who had vaginal closure were in Group 2 (N = 146). The results were compared. It included age, body mass index of the patient, the indication of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, size of the uterus, time taken during vault closure, and postoperative complications.

Results: The time taken by laparoscopic vault repair was significantly less than vaginal repair (19.7 ± 13.3 min vs. 30.1 ± 6.6 min, P < 0.001). There was postoperative vault infection (2.7%), vault hematoma (1.3%), and no vault prolapse seen in vaginal repair. The organisms isolated were mainly Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella.

Conclusion: Laparoscopic vault closure has shown significantly improved results compared to vaginal route repair.

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
16.70%
发文量
98
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Novel Technique of Laparoscopic Transabdominal Cerclage after a Mersilene Tape Erosion in a Prior Laparoscopic Radical Trachelectomy and Transvaginal Cerclage Patient. Comment on "Evaluation of the success of hysteroscopic uterine septum resection". Hysteroscopic Uterine Septum Resection: Is it a Successful Treatment for Infertile Patients? Laparoscopic Excision of Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy: An Optimum Management Option. Laparoscopic Posterior Pelvic Exenteration with Radical Vulvectomy for Intestinal-type Vulvar Adenocarcinoma.
×
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