首页> 外文期刊>Techniques in coloproctology >Comparative study of safety and outcomes of single-port access versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
【24h】

Comparative study of safety and outcomes of single-port access versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

机译:与传统腹腔镜结直肠癌手术相比,单端口进入的安全性和结局比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Single-port access (SPA) offers cosmetic advantages in addition to the well-recognised benefits of conventional multi-port laparoscopic (CL) surgery, and can be carried out using standard straight instruments. We report the outcomes of our early experience with SPA colorectal resections in comparison with CL surgery.We compared the following data, patient characteristics, operating time, morbidity, operative mortality, length of hospital stay and tumour variables, of patients who underwent SPA right, left, sigmoid and total colon resections, as well as high anterior resections and panproctocolectomies, with that of patients who underwent equivalent conventional laparoscopic (CL) operations. The 40 SPA and 78 CL patients studied underwent surgery between February 2008 and September 2011.There was no difference between the SPA and CL operations, as regards the patient's sex (55.0 vs. 62.8% males, p = 0.411), comorbidity (ASA I 10.0 vs. 12.8%; ASA II 57.5 vs. 59.0%; ASA III 32.5 vs. 25.6%; ASA IV 0 vs. 2.6%, p = 0.722) and body mass index (26.2 vs. 28.0 kg/m(2), p = 0.073). However, SPA patients were younger (mean age 54.1 vs. 64.8 years, p = 0.001), and malignancy was a less common indication for surgery (25.0 vs. 71.8%, p < 0.001). There were no conversions to open surgery, and one death occurred in the CL group (1.3%). Mean operating time (162 vs. 170 min, p = 0.547), median post-operative hospital stay (4 vs. 4 days, p = 0.255) and morbidity (7.5 vs. 12.8%, p = 0.538) were comparable.SPA laparoscopic surgery appears safe in the hands of experienced laparoscopic surgeons, with no increase in operating time, length of stay, morbidity and mortality. Selection of patients with indications for surgery for benign disease may be of importance to ensure an oncologically safe initial uptake of SPA colorectal practice.
机译:除了公认的传统多端口腹腔镜(CL)手术优势外,单端口通路(SPA)还提供了美容优势,并且可以使用标准的直线器械进行。我们报告了SPA大肠切除术与CL手术相比的早期经验结果,我们比较了接受SPA治疗的患者的以下数据,患者特征,手术时间,发病率,手术死亡率,住院时间和肿瘤变量,左,乙状结肠和全结肠切除术,高位前切除术和全结肠切除术,以及接受相同常规腹腔镜(CL)手术的患者。在2008年2月至2011年9月间接受研究的40例SPA和78例CL患者中,患者的性别(55.0%vs.62.8%男性,p = 0.411),合并症(ASA I)在SPA和CL手术之间没有差异。 10.0 vs. 12.8%; ASA II 57.5 vs. 59.0%; ASA III 32.5 vs. 25.6%; ASA IV 0 vs. 2.6%,p = 0.722)和体重指数(26.2 vs. 28.0 kg / m(2), p = 0.073)。但是,SPA患者较年轻(平均年龄54.1 vs. 64.8岁,p = 0.001),恶性肿瘤是较不常见的手术指征(25.0 vs. 71.8%,p <0.001)。没有转换为开放手术,CL组发生1例死亡(1.3%)。平均手术时间(162比170分钟,p = 0.547),中位住院时间(4比4天,p = 0.255)和发病率(7.5比12.8%,p = 0.538)相当。在经验丰富的腹腔镜外科医生手中,手术似乎是安全的,没有增加手术时间,住院时间,发病率和死亡率。选择具有良性疾病手术指征的患者对于确保从肿瘤学上安全地初步接受SPA大肠癌实践可能很重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号