单孔胆囊切除术治疗胆囊炎与非胆囊炎。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Marco Casaccia, Marta Ponzano, Tommaso Testa, Sofia Paola Martigli, Cecilia Contratto, Franco De Cian
{"title":"单孔胆囊切除术治疗胆囊炎与非胆囊炎。","authors":"Marco Casaccia,&nbsp;Marta Ponzano,&nbsp;Tommaso Testa,&nbsp;Sofia Paola Martigli,&nbsp;Cecilia Contratto,&nbsp;Franco De Cian","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>To assess the safety and efficacy of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) for the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis in different gallbladder pathologic conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients who underwent SPLC in our department between October 1, 2017 and March 31, 2020 were registered consecutively in a prospective database. Patients' charts were retrospectively divided according to histological diagnosis: normal gallbladder (NG) (n = 13), chronic cholecystitis (CC) (n =47), and acute cholecystitis (AC) (n = 10). The parameters for assessing the procedure outcome included operative time, blood loss, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Patient groups were statistically compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy patients underwent SPLC. Duration of surgery increased from NG (55 ± 22.7 min) to CC (70 ± 33.5 min), and to AC patients (110.5 ± 50.5 min), which is statistically significant (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>.001). Postoperative complication rates were 7.6% in NG patients, 17% in CC, and 30% in AC (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>.442). Length of hospitalization was shorter for NG patients (1.0 ± 0.6 days) versus CC (2.0 ± 1.1 days) and AC patients (2.0 ± 4.7 days), with statistical significance (<i>P </i>= .020). Multivariate analysis found that pathology type and the occurrence of postoperative complications were independent predictors for prolonged operative times and prolonged hospital stay, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPLC is feasible for acute and chronic cholecystitis with good procedural outcomes. Since SPLC technique itself can be sometimes challenging with the existing technology, its application, especially in cases of acute cholecystitis, should be done with caution. Only prospective randomized studies on this approach for acute and chronic gallbladder diseases will assess the complete reliability of this technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/fc/f5/e2022.00020.PMC9355797.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis.\",\"authors\":\"Marco Casaccia,&nbsp;Marta Ponzano,&nbsp;Tommaso Testa,&nbsp;Sofia Paola Martigli,&nbsp;Cecilia Contratto,&nbsp;Franco De Cian\",\"doi\":\"10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>To assess the safety and efficacy of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) for the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis in different gallbladder pathologic conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients who underwent SPLC in our department between October 1, 2017 and March 31, 2020 were registered consecutively in a prospective database. Patients' charts were retrospectively divided according to histological diagnosis: normal gallbladder (NG) (n = 13), chronic cholecystitis (CC) (n =47), and acute cholecystitis (AC) (n = 10). The parameters for assessing the procedure outcome included operative time, blood loss, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Patient groups were statistically compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy patients underwent SPLC. Duration of surgery increased from NG (55 ± 22.7 min) to CC (70 ± 33.5 min), and to AC patients (110.5 ± 50.5 min), which is statistically significant (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>.001). Postoperative complication rates were 7.6% in NG patients, 17% in CC, and 30% in AC (<i>P </i>=<i> </i>.442). Length of hospitalization was shorter for NG patients (1.0 ± 0.6 days) versus CC (2.0 ± 1.1 days) and AC patients (2.0 ± 4.7 days), with statistical significance (<i>P </i>= .020). Multivariate analysis found that pathology type and the occurrence of postoperative complications were independent predictors for prolonged operative times and prolonged hospital stay, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPLC is feasible for acute and chronic cholecystitis with good procedural outcomes. Since SPLC technique itself can be sometimes challenging with the existing technology, its application, especially in cases of acute cholecystitis, should be done with caution. Only prospective randomized studies on this approach for acute and chronic gallbladder diseases will assess the complete reliability of this technique.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/fc/f5/e2022.00020.PMC9355797.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020\",\"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":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00020","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: 1

摘要

背景与目的:评价单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SPLC)治疗不同胆囊病理条件下症状性胆石症的安全性和有效性。方法:2017年10月1日至2020年3月31日在我科接受SPLC的所有患者在前瞻性数据库中连续登记。根据组织学诊断将患者病历回顾性分为:正常胆囊(NG) (n = 13)、慢性胆囊炎(CC) (n =47)、急性胆囊炎(AC) (n = 10)。评估手术结果的参数包括手术时间、出血量、额外套管针的使用、转剖腹手术、术中和术后并发症以及住院时间。对患者组进行统计学比较。结果:70例患者行SPLC。手术时间由NG(55±22.7 min)增加到CC(70±33.5 min), AC(110.5±50.5 min),差异有统计学意义(P = .001)。NG患者术后并发症发生率为7.6%,CC患者为17%,AC患者为30% (P = 0.442)。NG患者住院时间(1.0±0.6 d)短于CC患者(2.0±1.1 d)和AC患者(2.0±4.7 d),差异有统计学意义(P = 0.020)。多因素分析发现,病理类型和术后并发症的发生分别是延长手术时间和延长住院时间的独立预测因素。结论:SPLC治疗急慢性胆囊炎是可行的,手术效果良好。由于SPLC技术本身有时与现有技术具有挑战性,因此其应用,特别是在急性胆囊炎病例中,应谨慎进行。只有前瞻性随机研究将这种方法用于急性和慢性胆囊疾病才能评估该技术的完全可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis.

Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis.

Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis.

Background and objectives: To assess the safety and efficacy of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) for the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis in different gallbladder pathologic conditions.

Methods: All patients who underwent SPLC in our department between October 1, 2017 and March 31, 2020 were registered consecutively in a prospective database. Patients' charts were retrospectively divided according to histological diagnosis: normal gallbladder (NG) (n = 13), chronic cholecystitis (CC) (n =47), and acute cholecystitis (AC) (n = 10). The parameters for assessing the procedure outcome included operative time, blood loss, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Patient groups were statistically compared.

Results: Seventy patients underwent SPLC. Duration of surgery increased from NG (55 ± 22.7 min) to CC (70 ± 33.5 min), and to AC patients (110.5 ± 50.5 min), which is statistically significant (P =.001). Postoperative complication rates were 7.6% in NG patients, 17% in CC, and 30% in AC (P =.442). Length of hospitalization was shorter for NG patients (1.0 ± 0.6 days) versus CC (2.0 ± 1.1 days) and AC patients (2.0 ± 4.7 days), with statistical significance (P = .020). Multivariate analysis found that pathology type and the occurrence of postoperative complications were independent predictors for prolonged operative times and prolonged hospital stay, respectively.

Conclusion: SPLC is feasible for acute and chronic cholecystitis with good procedural outcomes. Since SPLC technique itself can be sometimes challenging with the existing technology, its application, especially in cases of acute cholecystitis, should be done with caution. Only prospective randomized studies on this approach for acute and chronic gallbladder diseases will assess the complete reliability of this technique.

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
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
×
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