妇科腹腔镜下腹部入路技术的比较

Elif GUNDOGDU, Taner USTA
{"title":"妇科腹腔镜下腹部入路技术的比较","authors":"Elif GUNDOGDU, Taner USTA","doi":"10.16899/jcm.1338911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the safety of laparoscopic entry techniques.
 Materials and Methods: Within the scope of the study, medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopy due to various gynecological indications at our clinic between January 1, 2011, and July 1, 2015, were examined. Evaluation was conducted using our hospital’s electronic database.
 Results: In the patient cohort, direct trocar placement was preferred in 91.8% (1025 patients), Veress needle placement was used in 7.4% (82 patients), and an open technique was used in 0.8% (9 patients). In terms of entry sites, umbilicus was the most commonly chosen option, being preferred in 97.2% (1085 patients) of cases. In 2.4% of patients (27 patients), the midline abdominal trocar was preferred as the initial trocar insertion site. Among these patients, suprapubic incision was preferred in 62% (17 patients), while Lee-Huang point was chosen as the entry site in 38% (10 patients).Looking at the history of previous surgeries, 18.5% (206 patients) had a history of prior abdominal surgery, and 3.5% (39 patients) had undergone two previous surgical procedures. Only 0.1% (1 patient) had undergone three or more abdominal surgeries.
 Discussion: In conclusion, no clear superiority of one initial entry technique over another has been proven. Despite the extensive literature on laparoscopic entry, debates regarding the most effective method to prevent significant complications continue.","PeriodicalId":15449,"journal":{"name":"Journal of contemporary medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Abdominal Initial Entry Techniques in Gynecological Laparoscopy\",\"authors\":\"Elif GUNDOGDU, Taner USTA\",\"doi\":\"10.16899/jcm.1338911\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the safety of laparoscopic entry techniques.
 Materials and Methods: Within the scope of the study, medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopy due to various gynecological indications at our clinic between January 1, 2011, and July 1, 2015, were examined. Evaluation was conducted using our hospital’s electronic database.
 Results: In the patient cohort, direct trocar placement was preferred in 91.8% (1025 patients), Veress needle placement was used in 7.4% (82 patients), and an open technique was used in 0.8% (9 patients). In terms of entry sites, umbilicus was the most commonly chosen option, being preferred in 97.2% (1085 patients) of cases. In 2.4% of patients (27 patients), the midline abdominal trocar was preferred as the initial trocar insertion site. Among these patients, suprapubic incision was preferred in 62% (17 patients), while Lee-Huang point was chosen as the entry site in 38% (10 patients).Looking at the history of previous surgeries, 18.5% (206 patients) had a history of prior abdominal surgery, and 3.5% (39 patients) had undergone two previous surgical procedures. Only 0.1% (1 patient) had undergone three or more abdominal surgeries.
 Discussion: In conclusion, no clear superiority of one initial entry technique over another has been proven. Despite the extensive literature on laparoscopic entry, debates regarding the most effective method to prevent significant complications continue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15449,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of contemporary medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of contemporary medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.16899/jcm.1338911\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of contemporary medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16899/jcm.1338911","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是评估腹腔镜进入技术的安全性。 材料与方法:检索我院2011年1月1日至2015年7月1日期间因各种妇科指征行腹腔镜手术的患者病历。使用我院电子数据库进行评价。 结果:在患者队列中,91.8%(1025例)患者选择直接套管针放置,7.4%(82例)患者选择Veress针放置,0.8%(9例)患者选择开放式技术。在进入部位方面,脐部是最常用的选择,97.2%(1085例)的病例首选脐部。在2.4%的患者(27例)中,首选腹中线套管针作为套管针的初始插入位置。其中,有62%(17例)的患者选择耻骨上切口,38%(10例)的患者选择Lee-Huang点作为入路。回顾既往手术史,18.5%(206例)患者既往有腹部手术史,3.5%(39例)患者既往有两次手术史。只有0.1%(1名患者)接受了三次或三次以上的腹部手术。讨论:总之,没有一种初始入局技术明显优于另一种入局技术。尽管有大量关于腹腔镜入路的文献,关于预防重大并发症的最有效方法的争论仍在继续。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Abdominal Initial Entry Techniques in Gynecological Laparoscopy
Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the safety of laparoscopic entry techniques. Materials and Methods: Within the scope of the study, medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopy due to various gynecological indications at our clinic between January 1, 2011, and July 1, 2015, were examined. Evaluation was conducted using our hospital’s electronic database. Results: In the patient cohort, direct trocar placement was preferred in 91.8% (1025 patients), Veress needle placement was used in 7.4% (82 patients), and an open technique was used in 0.8% (9 patients). In terms of entry sites, umbilicus was the most commonly chosen option, being preferred in 97.2% (1085 patients) of cases. In 2.4% of patients (27 patients), the midline abdominal trocar was preferred as the initial trocar insertion site. Among these patients, suprapubic incision was preferred in 62% (17 patients), while Lee-Huang point was chosen as the entry site in 38% (10 patients).Looking at the history of previous surgeries, 18.5% (206 patients) had a history of prior abdominal surgery, and 3.5% (39 patients) had undergone two previous surgical procedures. Only 0.1% (1 patient) had undergone three or more abdominal surgeries. Discussion: In conclusion, no clear superiority of one initial entry technique over another has been proven. Despite the extensive literature on laparoscopic entry, debates regarding the most effective method to prevent significant complications continue.
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信