腹腔镜治疗穿孔溃疡的结果

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY Chirurgie Pub Date : 1999-04-01 DOI:10.1016/S0001-4001(99)80057-9
I. Lorand, N. Molinier, J.R. Sales, F. Douchez, F. Gayral
{"title":"腹腔镜治疗穿孔溃疡的结果","authors":"I. Lorand,&nbsp;N. Molinier,&nbsp;J.R. Sales,&nbsp;F. Douchez,&nbsp;F. Gayral","doi":"10.1016/S0001-4001(99)80057-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study aim</h3><p>The aim of this retrospective survey was to evaluate the results of laparoscopic treatment in perforated peptic ulcer.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>From 1989 to 1998, 84 patients were operated on for perforated ulcer. Sixty nine patients, operated on with videolaparoscopy, were included in this study: 53 men and 12 women with a mean age of 45 ± 16 years (19–85). Nine had a history of peptic ulcer disease and 12 received anti-inflammatory drugs. Perforation occurred in the duodenum (60 patients) and in the stomach (five patients). Laparoscopic treatment included peritoneal lavage and either a simple duodenal closure (51 patients), a closure with a highly selective vagotomy (one patient), an epiplooplasty (eight patients), or an excision-closure for the gastric ulcers (five patients). Drainage was associated in 38 patients (58%).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A conversion into laparotomy was necessary in six patients. Among the 59 patients treated with laparoscopy, 56 were only managed laparoscopically, three had exploration and peritoneal lavage through laparoscopy, and underwent suture of the perforation through minilaparotomy. Mean operative time was 105 ± 40 minutes (30–240). Mean postoperative hospital stay was 8.2 ± 4 days. Reoperation was performed in three patients for leakage (<em>n</em> = 2) and gall bladder perforation (<em>n</em> = 1). Complications were medically treated in three patients. There was no in-hospital mortality.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Laparoscopic management in perforated peptic ulcer is successful in 90% of the patients. Results are good. There was no postoperative death in this series.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":29786,"journal":{"name":"Chirurgie","volume":"124 2","pages":"Pages 149-153"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"1999-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0001-4001(99)80057-9","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Résultats du traitement cœlioscopique des ulcères perforés\",\"authors\":\"I. Lorand,&nbsp;N. Molinier,&nbsp;J.R. Sales,&nbsp;F. Douchez,&nbsp;F. Gayral\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0001-4001(99)80057-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Study aim</h3><p>The aim of this retrospective survey was to evaluate the results of laparoscopic treatment in perforated peptic ulcer.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>From 1989 to 1998, 84 patients were operated on for perforated ulcer. Sixty nine patients, operated on with videolaparoscopy, were included in this study: 53 men and 12 women with a mean age of 45 ± 16 years (19–85). Nine had a history of peptic ulcer disease and 12 received anti-inflammatory drugs. Perforation occurred in the duodenum (60 patients) and in the stomach (five patients). Laparoscopic treatment included peritoneal lavage and either a simple duodenal closure (51 patients), a closure with a highly selective vagotomy (one patient), an epiplooplasty (eight patients), or an excision-closure for the gastric ulcers (five patients). Drainage was associated in 38 patients (58%).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A conversion into laparotomy was necessary in six patients. Among the 59 patients treated with laparoscopy, 56 were only managed laparoscopically, three had exploration and peritoneal lavage through laparoscopy, and underwent suture of the perforation through minilaparotomy. Mean operative time was 105 ± 40 minutes (30–240). Mean postoperative hospital stay was 8.2 ± 4 days. Reoperation was performed in three patients for leakage (<em>n</em> = 2) and gall bladder perforation (<em>n</em> = 1). Complications were medically treated in three patients. There was no in-hospital mortality.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Laparoscopic management in perforated peptic ulcer is successful in 90% of the patients. Results are good. There was no postoperative death in this series.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chirurgie\",\"volume\":\"124 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 149-153\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0001-4001(99)80057-9\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chirurgie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001400199800579\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chirurgie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001400199800579","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

研究目的本回顾性调查的目的是评价腹腔镜治疗穿孔性消化性溃疡的效果。患者与方法1989 ~ 1998年对84例溃疡穿孔患者进行手术治疗。本研究纳入69例腹腔镜手术患者:男性53例,女性12例,平均年龄45±16岁(19-85岁)。9例有消化性溃疡病史,12例接受消炎药治疗。十二指肠穿孔(60例)和胃穿孔(5例)。腹腔镜治疗包括腹腔灌洗和简单的十二指肠关闭术(51例),高度选择性的迷走神经关闭术(1例),网膜成形术(8例),或切除-关闭胃溃疡(5例)。38例(58%)患者伴有引流。结果6例患者需转剖腹手术。59例经腹腔镜治疗的患者中,56例仅行腹腔镜治疗,3例行腹腔镜探查及灌胃,并行小切口缝合穿孔。平均手术时间105±40分钟(30-240分钟)。术后平均住院时间8.2±4天。3例患者因胆囊渗漏(n = 2)和胆囊穿孔(n = 1)再次手术,3例患者因并发症接受药物治疗。没有住院死亡率。结论腹腔镜治疗穿孔性消化性溃疡成功率达90%。结果很好。本组病例无术后死亡病例。
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
Résultats du traitement cœlioscopique des ulcères perforés

Study aim

The aim of this retrospective survey was to evaluate the results of laparoscopic treatment in perforated peptic ulcer.

Patients and methods

From 1989 to 1998, 84 patients were operated on for perforated ulcer. Sixty nine patients, operated on with videolaparoscopy, were included in this study: 53 men and 12 women with a mean age of 45 ± 16 years (19–85). Nine had a history of peptic ulcer disease and 12 received anti-inflammatory drugs. Perforation occurred in the duodenum (60 patients) and in the stomach (five patients). Laparoscopic treatment included peritoneal lavage and either a simple duodenal closure (51 patients), a closure with a highly selective vagotomy (one patient), an epiplooplasty (eight patients), or an excision-closure for the gastric ulcers (five patients). Drainage was associated in 38 patients (58%).

Results

A conversion into laparotomy was necessary in six patients. Among the 59 patients treated with laparoscopy, 56 were only managed laparoscopically, three had exploration and peritoneal lavage through laparoscopy, and underwent suture of the perforation through minilaparotomy. Mean operative time was 105 ± 40 minutes (30–240). Mean postoperative hospital stay was 8.2 ± 4 days. Reoperation was performed in three patients for leakage (n = 2) and gall bladder perforation (n = 1). Complications were medically treated in three patients. There was no in-hospital mortality.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic management in perforated peptic ulcer is successful in 90% of the patients. Results are good. There was no postoperative death in this series.

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
1.30
自引率
22.20%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Lebermetastasen neuroendokriner Tumoren Hepatozelluläres Karzinom [Osteoporosis: diagnostics and treatment]. Der Weg zum Kompetenzzentrum für Adipositas und metabolische Chirurgie – Erfahrungen aus 2 verschiedenen Kliniken Klinischer Stellenwert alternativer Technologien zur standardmäßigen laparoskopischen Cholezystektomie – Single-Port, Reduced-Port, Roboter, NOTES
×
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