{"title":"经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术与常规三孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术的比较:从诊断到住院费用。","authors":"Seung Min Baik, Kyung Sook Hong, Yong Il Kim","doi":"10.4174/jkss.2013.85.2.68","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Recently many cases of appendectomy have been conducted by single-incision laparoscopic technique. The aim of this study is to figure out the benefits of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA) compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2010 to 2012, 89 patients who were diagnosed as acute appendicitis and then underwent laparoscopic appendectomy a single surgeon were enrolled in this study and with their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Cases of complicated appendicitis confirmed on imaging tools and patients over 3 points on the American Society of Anesthesia score were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the total of 89 patients, there were 51 patients in the TULA group and 38 patients in the CTLA group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) of postoperative day (POD) #1 was higher in the TULA group than in the CTLA group (P = 0.048). The operative time and other variables had no statistical significances (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the insufficiency of instruments and the difficulty of handling, TULA was not worse in operative time, VAS after POD #2, and the total operative cost than CTLA. And, if there are no disadvantages of TULA, TULA may be suitable in substituting three-port laparoscopic surgery and could be considered as one field of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery with the improvement and development of the instruments and revised studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":49991,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society","volume":"85 2","pages":"68-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.2.68","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: from the diagnosis to the hospital cost.\",\"authors\":\"Seung Min Baik, Kyung Sook Hong, Yong Il Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.4174/jkss.2013.85.2.68\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Recently many cases of appendectomy have been conducted by single-incision laparoscopic technique. The aim of this study is to figure out the benefits of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA) compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2010 to 2012, 89 patients who were diagnosed as acute appendicitis and then underwent laparoscopic appendectomy a single surgeon were enrolled in this study and with their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Cases of complicated appendicitis confirmed on imaging tools and patients over 3 points on the American Society of Anesthesia score were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the total of 89 patients, there were 51 patients in the TULA group and 38 patients in the CTLA group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) of postoperative day (POD) #1 was higher in the TULA group than in the CTLA group (P = 0.048). The operative time and other variables had no statistical significances (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the insufficiency of instruments and the difficulty of handling, TULA was not worse in operative time, VAS after POD #2, and the total operative cost than CTLA. And, if there are no disadvantages of TULA, TULA may be suitable in substituting three-port laparoscopic surgery and could be considered as one field of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery with the improvement and development of the instruments and revised studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society\",\"volume\":\"85 2\",\"pages\":\"68-74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.2.68\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.2.68\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/7/25 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.2013.85.2.68","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparison of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: from the diagnosis to the hospital cost.
Purpose: Recently many cases of appendectomy have been conducted by single-incision laparoscopic technique. The aim of this study is to figure out the benefits of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TULA) compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA).
Methods: From 2010 to 2012, 89 patients who were diagnosed as acute appendicitis and then underwent laparoscopic appendectomy a single surgeon were enrolled in this study and with their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Cases of complicated appendicitis confirmed on imaging tools and patients over 3 points on the American Society of Anesthesia score were excluded.
Results: Among the total of 89 patients, there were 51 patients in the TULA group and 38 patients in the CTLA group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) of postoperative day (POD) #1 was higher in the TULA group than in the CTLA group (P = 0.048). The operative time and other variables had no statistical significances (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: Despite the insufficiency of instruments and the difficulty of handling, TULA was not worse in operative time, VAS after POD #2, and the total operative cost than CTLA. And, if there are no disadvantages of TULA, TULA may be suitable in substituting three-port laparoscopic surgery and could be considered as one field of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery with the improvement and development of the instruments and revised studies.