在无并发症阑尾炎的腹腔镜阑尾切除术中使用聚合夹与内环的优势:一项随机对照研究。

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE World Journal of Emergency Surgery Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI:10.1186/s13017-023-00507-6
Kil-Yong Lee, Jaeim Lee, Youn Young Park, Seong Taek Oh
{"title":"在无并发症阑尾炎的腹腔镜阑尾切除术中使用聚合夹与内环的优势:一项随机对照研究。","authors":"Kil-Yong Lee, Jaeim Lee, Youn Young Park, Seong Taek Oh","doi":"10.1186/s13017-023-00507-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polymeric clips are easy to apply, but whether they present more advantages than endoloops is unclear. This single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial study was conducted to compare the advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop in terms of the surgical time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult patients who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis without perforation on preoperative abdominal computed tomography and underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between August 6, 2019, and December 26, 2022, were included. Single-blinded randomization was performed in a 1:1 ratio between the endoloop and polymeric clip groups. The primary endpoint was the difference in surgery time between the polymeric clip and endoloop groups. The secondary endpoints were the difference in the application time of each instrument, difference in operation and anesthesia fees, as well as the frequency of complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The completed trial included 104 and 103 patients in the polymeric clip and endoloop groups, respectively. The median surgery time with a polymeric clip was shorter than that with an endoloop; however, the difference was not significant (18 min 56 s vs 19 min 49 s, p = 0.426). Interestingly, the median time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting in the polymeric clip group was significantly shorter than that in the endoloop group (49.0 s vs 84.5 s, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of surgical (p = 0.120) and anesthetic (p = 0.719) costs, as well as the total number of postoperative complications (p > 0.999).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A polymeric clip is a safe instrument that can reduce the time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting, although it does not affect the overall surgical time and operation fee when performing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>KCT0004154.</p>","PeriodicalId":48867,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Emergency Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10311724/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop during laparoscopic appendectomy in uncomplicated appendicitis: a randomized controlled study.\",\"authors\":\"Kil-Yong Lee, Jaeim Lee, Youn Young Park, Seong Taek Oh\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13017-023-00507-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polymeric clips are easy to apply, but whether they present more advantages than endoloops is unclear. This single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial study was conducted to compare the advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop in terms of the surgical time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult patients who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis without perforation on preoperative abdominal computed tomography and underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between August 6, 2019, and December 26, 2022, were included. Single-blinded randomization was performed in a 1:1 ratio between the endoloop and polymeric clip groups. The primary endpoint was the difference in surgery time between the polymeric clip and endoloop groups. The secondary endpoints were the difference in the application time of each instrument, difference in operation and anesthesia fees, as well as the frequency of complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The completed trial included 104 and 103 patients in the polymeric clip and endoloop groups, respectively. The median surgery time with a polymeric clip was shorter than that with an endoloop; however, the difference was not significant (18 min 56 s vs 19 min 49 s, p = 0.426). Interestingly, the median time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting in the polymeric clip group was significantly shorter than that in the endoloop group (49.0 s vs 84.5 s, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of surgical (p = 0.120) and anesthetic (p = 0.719) costs, as well as the total number of postoperative complications (p > 0.999).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A polymeric clip is a safe instrument that can reduce the time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting, although it does not affect the overall surgical time and operation fee when performing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>KCT0004154.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48867,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Emergency Surgery\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10311724/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Emergency Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-023-00507-6\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-023-00507-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:聚合物夹子很容易应用,但它们是否比内环更有优势尚不清楚。这项单中心、开放标签、随机对照试验研究旨在比较使用聚合夹与内环在手术时间方面的优势。方法:纳入2019年8月6日至2022年12月26日期间,术前腹部计算机断层扫描诊断为急性阑尾炎且未穿孔并行腹腔镜阑尾切除术的成年患者。在endoloop组和聚合物夹组之间按1:1的比例进行单盲随机化。主要终点是聚合物夹组和endoloop组手术时间的差异。次要终点为各器械使用时间的差异、手术费用和麻醉费用的差异以及并发症的发生频率。结果:完成的试验包括104例和103例患者,分别为聚合物夹组和endoloop组。聚合物夹的中位手术时间比内环短;但差异无统计学意义(18分56秒vs 19分49秒,p = 0.426)。有趣的是,聚合物夹组从应用器械到阑尾切割的中位时间明显短于endoloop组(49.0 s vs 84.5 s, p 0.999)。结论:对于无并发症的阑尾炎进行腹腔镜阑尾切除术时,聚合物夹在不影响手术总时间和手术费用的情况下,是一种安全的器械,可减少从器械到阑尾切割的时间。试验注册号:KCT0004154。
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

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
Advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop during laparoscopic appendectomy in uncomplicated appendicitis: a randomized controlled study.

Background: Polymeric clips are easy to apply, but whether they present more advantages than endoloops is unclear. This single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial study was conducted to compare the advantages of using a polymeric clip versus an endoloop in terms of the surgical time.

Methods: Adult patients who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis without perforation on preoperative abdominal computed tomography and underwent laparoscopic appendectomy between August 6, 2019, and December 26, 2022, were included. Single-blinded randomization was performed in a 1:1 ratio between the endoloop and polymeric clip groups. The primary endpoint was the difference in surgery time between the polymeric clip and endoloop groups. The secondary endpoints were the difference in the application time of each instrument, difference in operation and anesthesia fees, as well as the frequency of complications.

Results: The completed trial included 104 and 103 patients in the polymeric clip and endoloop groups, respectively. The median surgery time with a polymeric clip was shorter than that with an endoloop; however, the difference was not significant (18 min 56 s vs 19 min 49 s, p = 0.426). Interestingly, the median time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting in the polymeric clip group was significantly shorter than that in the endoloop group (49.0 s vs 84.5 s, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of surgical (p = 0.120) and anesthetic (p = 0.719) costs, as well as the total number of postoperative complications (p > 0.999).

Conclusion: A polymeric clip is a safe instrument that can reduce the time from applying the instrument to appendiceal cutting, although it does not affect the overall surgical time and operation fee when performing laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis.

Trial registration: KCT0004154.

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
World Journal of Emergency Surgery
World Journal of Emergency Surgery EMERGENCY MEDICINE-SURGERY
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The World Journal of Emergency Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal covering all facets of clinical and basic research in traumatic and non-traumatic emergency surgery and related fields. Topics include emergency surgery, acute care surgery, trauma surgery, intensive care, trauma management, and resuscitation, among others.
期刊最新文献
Prophylactic PICO◊ dressing shortens wound dressing requirements post emergency laparotomy (EL-PICO◊ trial) A new technology for medical and surgical data organisation: the WSES-WJES Decentralised Knowledge Graph Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) enhances hemodynamic stability decreasing analgesic requirements in surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) Ultra minimally invasive surgical stabilization of Rib fractures (uMI-SSRF): reduction and fixation techniques to minimize the surgical wound Ultrasonic dissection versus electrocautery dissection in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a randomized controlled trial (SONOCHOL-trial)
×
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