腹腔镜治疗穿孔性腹膜炎的可行性和结果:一项倾向评分匹配的前瞻性队列研究。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Shruti Soni, Yash Kumar Parihar, Ramkaran Chaudhary, Naveen Sharma, Mahaveer Singh Rodha, Mahendra Lodha, Manoj Kumar Gupta, Nikhil Kothari, Aditya Baksi, Ashok Kumar Puranik
{"title":"腹腔镜治疗穿孔性腹膜炎的可行性和结果:一项倾向评分匹配的前瞻性队列研究。","authors":"Shruti Soni, Yash Kumar Parihar, Ramkaran Chaudhary, Naveen Sharma, Mahaveer Singh Rodha, Mahendra Lodha, Manoj Kumar Gupta, Nikhil Kothari, Aditya Baksi, Ashok Kumar Puranik","doi":"10.4103/jmas.jmas_135_25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Perforation peritonitis remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in emergency surgical patients. Conventionally, open laparotomy has been the preferred approach. However, with advancements in minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic management has emerged as a potential alternative. The study aims to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared to open laparotomy in managing perforation peritonitis.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A prospective observational study was conducted from January 2022 to May 2023 for patients diagnosed with perforation peritonitis. A total of 140 patients were recruited, 110 patients underwent laparotomy while 30 patients underwent laparoscopic management. Propensity score matching (PSM) in 1:1 ratio was applied to balance confounding variables, resulting in two matched groups of 28 patients each. Operative time, length of post-operative stay, post-operative Visual Analogue Scale score, morbidity and mortality rates were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (217.43 ± 86.10 min) compared to the laparotomy group (182.46 ± 31.63 min; P = 0.049). However, patients in the laparoscopic group experienced a significantly shorter hospital stay (4.39 ± 2.04 days vs. 8.68 ± 3.45 days; P < 0.001) and lower post-operative pain scores at all time points (P < 0.012). The 30-day morbidity rate was lower in the laparoscopic group (10% vs. 32%), with fewer surgical site infections and reoperations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laparoscopy is a feasible and effective alternative to laparotomy in selected cases of perforation peritonitis, offering benefits such as reduced post-operative pain and shorter hospital stay. Despite technical challenges, improved surgical expertise and patient selection can enhance its role in emergency surgical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48905,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility and outcomes of laparoscopic management in perforation peritonitis: A prospective cohort study with propensity score matching.\",\"authors\":\"Shruti Soni, Yash Kumar Parihar, Ramkaran Chaudhary, Naveen Sharma, Mahaveer Singh Rodha, Mahendra Lodha, Manoj Kumar Gupta, Nikhil Kothari, Aditya Baksi, Ashok Kumar Puranik\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jmas.jmas_135_25\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Perforation peritonitis remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in emergency surgical patients. Conventionally, open laparotomy has been the preferred approach. However, with advancements in minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic management has emerged as a potential alternative. The study aims to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared to open laparotomy in managing perforation peritonitis.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A prospective observational study was conducted from January 2022 to May 2023 for patients diagnosed with perforation peritonitis. A total of 140 patients were recruited, 110 patients underwent laparotomy while 30 patients underwent laparoscopic management. Propensity score matching (PSM) in 1:1 ratio was applied to balance confounding variables, resulting in two matched groups of 28 patients each. Operative time, length of post-operative stay, post-operative Visual Analogue Scale score, morbidity and mortality rates were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (217.43 ± 86.10 min) compared to the laparotomy group (182.46 ± 31.63 min; P = 0.049). However, patients in the laparoscopic group experienced a significantly shorter hospital stay (4.39 ± 2.04 days vs. 8.68 ± 3.45 days; P < 0.001) and lower post-operative pain scores at all time points (P < 0.012). The 30-day morbidity rate was lower in the laparoscopic group (10% vs. 32%), with fewer surgical site infections and reoperations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laparoscopy is a feasible and effective alternative to laparotomy in selected cases of perforation peritonitis, offering benefits such as reduced post-operative pain and shorter hospital stay. Despite technical challenges, improved surgical expertise and patient selection can enhance its role in emergency surgical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_135_25\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_135_25","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:穿孔性腹膜炎仍然是急诊手术患者发病和死亡的重要原因。传统上,开腹手术是首选的方法。然而,随着微创技术的进步,腹腔镜治疗已成为一种潜在的替代方法。本研究旨在评估腹腔镜手术与开腹手术治疗穿孔性腹膜炎的可行性和有效性。患者和方法:2022年1月至2023年5月,对诊断为穿孔性腹膜炎的患者进行了一项前瞻性观察研究。共招募140例患者,其中110例患者行剖腹手术,30例患者行腹腔镜治疗。采用1:1比例的倾向评分匹配(PSM)来平衡混杂变量,得到两个匹配组,每组28例患者。比较两组手术时间、术后住院时间、术后视觉模拟量表评分、发病率和死亡率。结果:腹腔镜组平均手术时间(217.43±86.10 min)明显长于开腹组(182.46±31.63 min);P = 0.049)。然而,腹腔镜组患者的住院时间明显缩短(4.39±2.04天vs. 8.68±3.45天;P < 0.001),术后各时间点疼痛评分均较低(P < 0.012)。腹腔镜组30天的发病率较低(10% vs. 32%),手术部位感染和再手术较少。结论:在穿孔性腹膜炎患者中,腹腔镜手术是一种可行且有效的替代开腹手术的方法,可减少术后疼痛,缩短住院时间。尽管存在技术上的挑战,但改进的外科专业知识和患者选择可以增强其在紧急外科环境中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Feasibility and outcomes of laparoscopic management in perforation peritonitis: A prospective cohort study with propensity score matching.

Background: Perforation peritonitis remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in emergency surgical patients. Conventionally, open laparotomy has been the preferred approach. However, with advancements in minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic management has emerged as a potential alternative. The study aims to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared to open laparotomy in managing perforation peritonitis.

Patients and methods: A prospective observational study was conducted from January 2022 to May 2023 for patients diagnosed with perforation peritonitis. A total of 140 patients were recruited, 110 patients underwent laparotomy while 30 patients underwent laparoscopic management. Propensity score matching (PSM) in 1:1 ratio was applied to balance confounding variables, resulting in two matched groups of 28 patients each. Operative time, length of post-operative stay, post-operative Visual Analogue Scale score, morbidity and mortality rates were compared.

Results: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (217.43 ± 86.10 min) compared to the laparotomy group (182.46 ± 31.63 min; P = 0.049). However, patients in the laparoscopic group experienced a significantly shorter hospital stay (4.39 ± 2.04 days vs. 8.68 ± 3.45 days; P < 0.001) and lower post-operative pain scores at all time points (P < 0.012). The 30-day morbidity rate was lower in the laparoscopic group (10% vs. 32%), with fewer surgical site infections and reoperations.

Conclusion: Laparoscopy is a feasible and effective alternative to laparotomy in selected cases of perforation peritonitis, offering benefits such as reduced post-operative pain and shorter hospital stay. Despite technical challenges, improved surgical expertise and patient selection can enhance its role in emergency surgical settings.

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
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Minimal Access Surgery (JMAS), the official publication of Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endo Surgeons, launched in early 2005. The JMAS, a quarterly publication, is the first English-language journal from India, as also from this part of the world, dedicated to Minimal Access Surgery. The JMAS boasts an outstanding editorial board comprising of Indian and international experts in the field.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信