单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术与三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的比较:前瞻性随机研究。

Journal of the Korean Surgical Society Pub Date : 2013-12-01 Epub Date: 2013-11-26 DOI:10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275
Ugur Deveci, Umut Barbaros, Mahmut Sertan Kapakli, Manuk Norayk Manukyan, Selçuk Simşek, Abut Kebudi, Selçuk Mercan
{"title":"单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术与三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的比较:前瞻性随机研究。","authors":"Ugur Deveci,&nbsp;Umut Barbaros,&nbsp;Mahmut Sertan Kapakli,&nbsp;Manuk Norayk Manukyan,&nbsp;Selçuk Simşek,&nbsp;Abut Kebudi,&nbsp;Selçuk Mercan","doi":"10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Laparoscopic techniques have allowed surgeons to perform complicated intra-abdominal surgery with minimal trauma. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was developed with the aim of reducing the invasiveness of conventional laparoscopy. In this study we aimed to compare results of SILS cholecystectomy and three port conventional laparoscopic (TPCL) cholecystectomy prospectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective study, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease were randomly allocated to SILS cholecystectomy (group 1) or TPCL cholecystectomy (group 2). Demographics, pathologic diagnosis, operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, pain score, conversion rate, and satisfaction of cosmetic outcome were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-four SILS cholesystectomies (88%) and 42 TPCL cholecystectomies (84%) were completed successfully. Conversion to open surgery was required for 4 cases in group 1 and 6 cases in group 2. Operating time was significantly longer in group 1 compared with group 2 (73 minutes vs. 48 minutes; P < 0.05). Higher pain scores were observed in group 1 versus group 2 in postoperative day 1 (P < 0.05). There was higher cosmetic satisfaction in group 1 (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SILS cholecystectomy performed by experienced surgeons is at least as successful, feasible, effective and safe as a TPCL cholecystectomy. Surgeons performing SILS should have a firm foundation of advanced minimal access surgical skills and a cautious, gradated approach to attempt the various procedures. Prospective randomized studies comparing single access versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with large volumes and long-term follow-up, are needed to confirm our initial experience. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01772745.).</p>","PeriodicalId":49991,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275","citationCount":"44","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective randomized study.\",\"authors\":\"Ugur Deveci,&nbsp;Umut Barbaros,&nbsp;Mahmut Sertan Kapakli,&nbsp;Manuk Norayk Manukyan,&nbsp;Selçuk Simşek,&nbsp;Abut Kebudi,&nbsp;Selçuk Mercan\",\"doi\":\"10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Laparoscopic techniques have allowed surgeons to perform complicated intra-abdominal surgery with minimal trauma. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was developed with the aim of reducing the invasiveness of conventional laparoscopy. In this study we aimed to compare results of SILS cholecystectomy and three port conventional laparoscopic (TPCL) cholecystectomy prospectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective study, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease were randomly allocated to SILS cholecystectomy (group 1) or TPCL cholecystectomy (group 2). Demographics, pathologic diagnosis, operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, pain score, conversion rate, and satisfaction of cosmetic outcome were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-four SILS cholesystectomies (88%) and 42 TPCL cholecystectomies (84%) were completed successfully. Conversion to open surgery was required for 4 cases in group 1 and 6 cases in group 2. Operating time was significantly longer in group 1 compared with group 2 (73 minutes vs. 48 minutes; P < 0.05). Higher pain scores were observed in group 1 versus group 2 in postoperative day 1 (P < 0.05). There was higher cosmetic satisfaction in group 1 (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SILS cholecystectomy performed by experienced surgeons is at least as successful, feasible, effective and safe as a TPCL cholecystectomy. Surgeons performing SILS should have a firm foundation of advanced minimal access surgical skills and a cautious, gradated approach to attempt the various procedures. Prospective randomized studies comparing single access versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with large volumes and long-term follow-up, are needed to confirm our initial experience. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01772745.).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275\",\"citationCount\":\"44\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/11/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 44

摘要

目的:腹腔镜技术使外科医生能够以最小的创伤进行复杂的腹腔手术。单切口腹腔镜手术(SILS)是为了减少传统腹腔镜的侵入性而发展起来的。在这项研究中,我们旨在前瞻性地比较SILS胆囊切除术和三孔传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术的结果。方法:本前瞻性研究选取100例因胆囊疾病行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者,随机分为SILS胆囊切除术(1组)和TPCL胆囊切除术(2组)两组。记录人口统计学、病理诊断、手术时间、出血量、住院时间、并发症、疼痛评分、转换率和美容效果满意度。结果:成功完成44例SILS胆囊切除术(88%)和42例TPCL胆囊切除术(84%)。1组4例,2组6例需转开腹手术。1组手术时间明显长于2组(73 min vs. 48 min;P < 0.05)。术后第1天,1组疼痛评分高于2组(P < 0.05)。第一组患者美容满意度较高(P < 0.05)。结论:经验丰富的外科医生行SILS胆囊切除术与TPCL胆囊切除术一样成功、可行、有效和安全。进行SILS手术的外科医生应具备先进的微创手术技术的坚实基础,并采取谨慎、渐进的方法来尝试各种手术。比较单通道与传统多口腹腔镜胆囊切除术的前瞻性随机研究,需要大容量和长期随访,以证实我们的初步经验。(ClinicalTrials.gov识别码:NCT01772745)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective randomized study.

Purpose: Laparoscopic techniques have allowed surgeons to perform complicated intra-abdominal surgery with minimal trauma. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was developed with the aim of reducing the invasiveness of conventional laparoscopy. In this study we aimed to compare results of SILS cholecystectomy and three port conventional laparoscopic (TPCL) cholecystectomy prospectively.

Methods: In this prospective study, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease were randomly allocated to SILS cholecystectomy (group 1) or TPCL cholecystectomy (group 2). Demographics, pathologic diagnosis, operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, pain score, conversion rate, and satisfaction of cosmetic outcome were recorded.

Results: Forty-four SILS cholesystectomies (88%) and 42 TPCL cholecystectomies (84%) were completed successfully. Conversion to open surgery was required for 4 cases in group 1 and 6 cases in group 2. Operating time was significantly longer in group 1 compared with group 2 (73 minutes vs. 48 minutes; P < 0.05). Higher pain scores were observed in group 1 versus group 2 in postoperative day 1 (P < 0.05). There was higher cosmetic satisfaction in group 1 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: SILS cholecystectomy performed by experienced surgeons is at least as successful, feasible, effective and safe as a TPCL cholecystectomy. Surgeons performing SILS should have a firm foundation of advanced minimal access surgical skills and a cautious, gradated approach to attempt the various procedures. Prospective randomized studies comparing single access versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with large volumes and long-term follow-up, are needed to confirm our initial experience. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01772745.).

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Matrix Metalloproteinase 41 : inside the presidency of George H.W. Bush Risk factors for lymph node metastasis in mucosal gastric cancer and re-evaluation of endoscopic submucosal dissection The optimal follow-up period in patients with above 5-year disease-free survival after curative liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective randomized study.
×
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