单切口腹腔镜阑尾切除术与常规腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的比较研究。

Jungwoo Kang, Byung Noe Bae, Geumhee Gwak, Inseok Park, Hyunjin Cho, Keunho Yang, Ki Whan Kim, Sehwan Han, Hong-Joo Kim, Young-Duck Kim
{"title":"单切口腹腔镜阑尾切除术与常规腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的比较研究。","authors":"Jungwoo Kang,&nbsp;Byung Noe Bae,&nbsp;Geumhee Gwak,&nbsp;Inseok Park,&nbsp;Hyunjin Cho,&nbsp;Keunho Yang,&nbsp;Ki Whan Kim,&nbsp;Sehwan Han,&nbsp;Hong-Joo Kim,&nbsp;Young-Duck Kim","doi":"10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>For the treatment of acute appendicitis, a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been widely performed. Recently, the use of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is increasing because it is believed to have advantages over conventional laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we compared SILS and a conventional LA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed the 217 patients who received laparoscopy-assisted appendectomies between August 2010 and April 2012 at Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital. One hundred-twelve patients underwent SILS, and 105 patients underwent LA. For the two groups, we compared the operation times, postoperative laboratory results, postoperative pain, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The patients' demographics, including body mass index, were not significantly different between the two groups. There were 6 perforated appendicitis cases in the SILS group and 5 cases in the LA group. The mean operative time in the SILS group was 65.88 ± 22.74 minutes whereas that in the LA group was 61.70 ± 22.27 minutes (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in the mean hospital stays, use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and wound infections between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Postoperative pain, complications and hospital stay showed no statistically significant differences between the SILS and the LA groups. However, our SILS method uses a single trocar and two latex tubes, so cost savings and reduced interference during surgery are expected.</p>","PeriodicalId":17346,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b6/7d/jksc-28-304.PMC3548145.pdf","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.\",\"authors\":\"Jungwoo Kang,&nbsp;Byung Noe Bae,&nbsp;Geumhee Gwak,&nbsp;Inseok Park,&nbsp;Hyunjin Cho,&nbsp;Keunho Yang,&nbsp;Ki Whan Kim,&nbsp;Sehwan Han,&nbsp;Hong-Joo Kim,&nbsp;Young-Duck Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>For the treatment of acute appendicitis, a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been widely performed. Recently, the use of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is increasing because it is believed to have advantages over conventional laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we compared SILS and a conventional LA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed the 217 patients who received laparoscopy-assisted appendectomies between August 2010 and April 2012 at Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital. One hundred-twelve patients underwent SILS, and 105 patients underwent LA. For the two groups, we compared the operation times, postoperative laboratory results, postoperative pain, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The patients' demographics, including body mass index, were not significantly different between the two groups. There were 6 perforated appendicitis cases in the SILS group and 5 cases in the LA group. The mean operative time in the SILS group was 65.88 ± 22.74 minutes whereas that in the LA group was 61.70 ± 22.27 minutes (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in the mean hospital stays, use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and wound infections between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Postoperative pain, complications and hospital stay showed no statistically significant differences between the SILS and the LA groups. However, our SILS method uses a single trocar and two latex tubes, so cost savings and reduced interference during surgery are expected.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17346,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b6/7d/jksc-28-304.PMC3548145.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2012/12/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.6.304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/12/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

目的:在急性阑尾炎的治疗中,传统的腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)已被广泛应用。近年来,单切口腹腔镜手术(SILS)的使用越来越多,因为它被认为比传统的腹腔镜手术有优势。在这项研究中,我们比较了SILS和传统的LA。方法:对2010年8月至2012年4月仁济大学附属白尚溪医院行腹腔镜阑尾切除术的217例患者进行分析。112例患者行SILS, 105例患者行LA。对于两组,我们比较了手术次数、术后实验室结果、术后疼痛、住院时间和术后并发症。结果:两组患者的人口统计学指标,包括体重指数,差异无统计学意义。SILS组有6例阑尾炎穿孔,LA组有5例。SILS组平均手术时间为65.88±22.74 min, LA组平均手术时间为61.70±22.27 min (P = 0.276)。两组患者的平均住院时间、非甾体类抗炎药的使用和伤口感染均无显著差异。结论:SILS组与LA组术后疼痛、并发症及住院时间差异无统计学意义。然而,我们的SILS方法使用一个套管针和两个乳胶管,因此可以节省成本并减少手术过程中的干扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Comparative study of a single-incision laparoscopic and a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy for the treatment of acute appendicitis.

Purpose: For the treatment of acute appendicitis, a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been widely performed. Recently, the use of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is increasing because it is believed to have advantages over conventional laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we compared SILS and a conventional LA.

Methods: We analyzed the 217 patients who received laparoscopy-assisted appendectomies between August 2010 and April 2012 at Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital. One hundred-twelve patients underwent SILS, and 105 patients underwent LA. For the two groups, we compared the operation times, postoperative laboratory results, postoperative pain, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

Results: The patients' demographics, including body mass index, were not significantly different between the two groups. There were 6 perforated appendicitis cases in the SILS group and 5 cases in the LA group. The mean operative time in the SILS group was 65.88 ± 22.74 minutes whereas that in the LA group was 61.70 ± 22.27 minutes (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in the mean hospital stays, use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, and wound infections between the two groups.

Conclusion: Postoperative pain, complications and hospital stay showed no statistically significant differences between the SILS and the LA groups. However, our SILS method uses a single trocar and two latex tubes, so cost savings and reduced interference during surgery are expected.

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