腹腔镜袖状胃切除术中网膜切除术与沿缝线夹持术的术后早期疗效比较:随机研究

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Obesity Surgery Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-12 DOI:10.1007/s11695-024-07543-4
Muhammed Taha Demirpolat, Mehmet Muzaffer Islam, Mehmet Erman Bacaksiz, Suleyman Caglar Ertekin, Abdullah Sisik
{"title":"腹腔镜袖状胃切除术中网膜切除术与沿缝线夹持术的术后早期疗效比较:随机研究","authors":"Muhammed Taha Demirpolat, Mehmet Muzaffer Islam, Mehmet Erman Bacaksiz, Suleyman Caglar Ertekin, Abdullah Sisik","doi":"10.1007/s11695-024-07543-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to compare the omentopexy and clipping reinforcement methods performed along the staple line during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in terms of the effectiveness on postoperative bleeding.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients were divided into two groups: clips group (CG) and omentopexy group (OG). The groups were compared in terms of postoperative bleeding, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions in the postoperative first 30-days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 148 patients were included in the study. Postoperative bleeding was observed in 11 patients (14.9%) of CG and 2 patients (2.7%) of the OG, and the difference between the groups was found to be significant (p = 0.009). Similarly, the number of patients with bleeding that did not require intervention was 9 (12.2%) in CG and 2 (2.7%) in OG, and the difference between the groups was also significant (p = 0.028). The duration of surgery in the CG was 30 (27 to 36) minutes, whereas in the OG, it was 43 (39 to 45) minutes, with a significant difference noted (p < 0.001). Additionally, the rate of patients readmitted to the hospital within the first 30 days was 16 (21.6%) in the CG and 7 (9.5%) in the OG, with a significant difference observed (p = 0.041).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In terms of bleeding requiring intervention, there was no difference between omentopexy and clipping techniques. In addition, omentopexy showed more satisfactory results than clipping in terms of non-interventional bleeding, but its clinical significance is unclear.</p>","PeriodicalId":19460,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"4116-4124"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Early Postoperative Outcomes of Omentopexy and Clips along the Staple Line During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Randomized Study.\",\"authors\":\"Muhammed Taha Demirpolat, Mehmet Muzaffer Islam, Mehmet Erman Bacaksiz, Suleyman Caglar Ertekin, Abdullah Sisik\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11695-024-07543-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to compare the omentopexy and clipping reinforcement methods performed along the staple line during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in terms of the effectiveness on postoperative bleeding.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients were divided into two groups: clips group (CG) and omentopexy group (OG). The groups were compared in terms of postoperative bleeding, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions in the postoperative first 30-days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 148 patients were included in the study. Postoperative bleeding was observed in 11 patients (14.9%) of CG and 2 patients (2.7%) of the OG, and the difference between the groups was found to be significant (p = 0.009). Similarly, the number of patients with bleeding that did not require intervention was 9 (12.2%) in CG and 2 (2.7%) in OG, and the difference between the groups was also significant (p = 0.028). The duration of surgery in the CG was 30 (27 to 36) minutes, whereas in the OG, it was 43 (39 to 45) minutes, with a significant difference noted (p < 0.001). Additionally, the rate of patients readmitted to the hospital within the first 30 days was 16 (21.6%) in the CG and 7 (9.5%) in the OG, with a significant difference observed (p = 0.041).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In terms of bleeding requiring intervention, there was no difference between omentopexy and clipping techniques. In addition, omentopexy showed more satisfactory results than clipping in terms of non-interventional bleeding, but its clinical significance is unclear.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obesity Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4116-4124\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obesity Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-024-07543-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obesity Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-024-07543-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:我们的目的是比较腹腔镜袖状胃切除术(LSG)中沿缝合线实施的网膜切除术和剪切加固法对术后出血的影响:我们的目的是比较腹腔镜袖带胃切除术(LSG)中沿缝合线实施的网膜切除术和剪切加固法对术后出血的影响:在这项前瞻性随机对照研究中,患者被分为两组:夹线组(CG)和网膜剥脱组(OG)。两组患者在术后出血量、手术时间、住院时间、术后 30 天内再住院率等方面进行了比较:研究共纳入 148 名患者。观察发现,CG 组有 11 名患者(14.9%)术后出血,OG 组有 2 名患者(2.7%)术后出血,组间差异显著(P = 0.009)。同样,出血而无需干预的患者人数,CG 组有 9 人(12.2%),OG 组有 2 人(2.7%),组间差异也有显著性(P = 0.028)。CG 组的手术时间为 30 分钟(27 至 36 分钟),而 OG 组为 43 分钟(39 至 45 分钟),两组间差异显著(p 结论:CG 组和 OG 组的手术时间差异显著(p = 0.028):就需要干预的出血量而言,网膜剥脱术和剪切术没有差异。此外,就非介入性出血而言,网膜剥脱术比剪切术的效果更令人满意,但其临床意义尚不明确。
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
Comparison of Early Postoperative Outcomes of Omentopexy and Clips along the Staple Line During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Randomized Study.

Background: We aimed to compare the omentopexy and clipping reinforcement methods performed along the staple line during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in terms of the effectiveness on postoperative bleeding.

Methods: In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients were divided into two groups: clips group (CG) and omentopexy group (OG). The groups were compared in terms of postoperative bleeding, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions in the postoperative first 30-days.

Results: A total of 148 patients were included in the study. Postoperative bleeding was observed in 11 patients (14.9%) of CG and 2 patients (2.7%) of the OG, and the difference between the groups was found to be significant (p = 0.009). Similarly, the number of patients with bleeding that did not require intervention was 9 (12.2%) in CG and 2 (2.7%) in OG, and the difference between the groups was also significant (p = 0.028). The duration of surgery in the CG was 30 (27 to 36) minutes, whereas in the OG, it was 43 (39 to 45) minutes, with a significant difference noted (p < 0.001). Additionally, the rate of patients readmitted to the hospital within the first 30 days was 16 (21.6%) in the CG and 7 (9.5%) in the OG, with a significant difference observed (p = 0.041).

Conclusion: In terms of bleeding requiring intervention, there was no difference between omentopexy and clipping techniques. In addition, omentopexy showed more satisfactory results than clipping in terms of non-interventional bleeding, but its clinical significance is unclear.

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
Obesity Surgery
Obesity Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
24.10%
发文量
567
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Obesity Surgery is the official journal of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and metabolic disorders (IFSO). A journal for bariatric/metabolic surgeons, Obesity Surgery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for communicating the latest research, surgical and laparoscopic techniques, for treatment of massive obesity and metabolic disorders. Topics covered include original research, clinical reports, current status, guidelines, historical notes, invited commentaries, letters to the editor, medicolegal issues, meeting abstracts, modern surgery/technical innovations, new concepts, reviews, scholarly presentations and opinions. Obesity Surgery benefits surgeons performing obesity/metabolic surgery, general surgeons and surgical residents, endoscopists, anesthetists, support staff, nurses, dietitians, psychiatrists, psychologists, plastic surgeons, internists including endocrinologists and diabetologists, nutritional scientists, and those dealing with eating disorders.
期刊最新文献
Correction: A Longer Biliopancreatic Limb and Shorter Common Channel Enhance Weight Loss But May Have Harmful Effects in Mouse Models of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Use of Probiotics and Synbiotics in the Treatment of Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) and Other Gastrointestinal Symptoms After Metabolic Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Further Exploration of Calibration Tube Usage in Sleeve Gastrectomy: Balancing Technology and Practice. Time to Put LDL Cholesterol on the Roadmap in Bariatric Surgery Guidelines. Applying the Principles of Trauma-Informed Care to the Evaluation and Management of Patients Who Undergo Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.
×
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