首页> 外文期刊>The British Journal of Surgery >Randomized clinical trial of stapler versus clamp-crushing transection in elective liver resection
【24h】

Randomized clinical trial of stapler versus clamp-crushing transection in elective liver resection

机译:吻合器与钳夹横切术在选择性肝切除中的随机临床试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Various devices have been developed to facilitate liver transection and reduce blood loss in liver resections. None of these has proven superiority compared with the classical clamp-crushing technique. This randomized clinical trial compared the effectiveness and safety of stapler transection with that of clamp-crushing during open liver resection. Methods: Patients admitted for elective open liver resection between January 2010 and October 2011 were assigned randomly to stapler transection or the clamp-crushing technique. The primary endpoint was the total amount of intraoperative blood loss. Secondary endpoints included transection time, duration of operation, complication rates and resection margins. Results: A total of 130 patients were enrolled, 65 to clamp-crushing and 65 to stapler transection. There was no difference between groups in total intraoperative blood loss: median (i.q.r.) 1050 (525-1650) versus 925 (450-1425) ml respectively (P = 0·279). The difference in total intraoperative blood loss normalized to the transection surface area was not statistically significant (P = 0·092). Blood loss during parenchymal transection was significantly lower in the stapler transection group (P = 0·002), as were the parenchymal transection time (mean(s.d.) 30(21) versus 9(7) min for clamp-crushing and stapler transection groups respectively; P < 0·001) and total duration of operation (mean(s.d.) 221(86) versus 190(85) min; P = 0·047). There were no significant differences in postoperative morbidity (P = 0·863) or mortality (P = 0·684) between groups. Conclusion: Stapler transection is a safe technique but does not reduce intraoperative blood loss in elective liver resection compared with the clamp-crushing technique.
机译:背景:已经开发出各种装置来促进肝横切并减少肝切除术中的失血。与经典的钳式破碎技术相比,这些方法都没有被证明具有优势。这项随机临床试验比较了开放性肝切除术中吻合器切开术与钳夹术的有效性和安全性。方法:将2010年1月至2011年10月期间接受择期开放性肝切除术的患者随机分为订书机横切术或钳夹术。主要终点是术中失血总量。次要终点包括横断时间,手术持续时间,并发症发生率和切除范围。结果:总共招募了130例患者,其中65例行钳夹术,65例行吻合器切开术。两组术中总失血量无差异:中位数(i.q.r.)分别为1050(525-1650)和925(450-1425)ml(P = 0·279)。标准化为横切表面积的术中总失血量差异无统计学意义(P = 0·092)。吻合器切开组的实质横切过程中的失血量显着降低(P = 0·002),钳夹式和吻合器切开组的实质切变时间(平均(sd)30(21)vs 9(7)min)分别; P <0·001)和总手术时间(平均221(86)对190(85)分钟; P = 0·047)。两组之间的术后发病率(P = 0·863)或死亡率(P = 0·684)没有显着差异。结论:吻合器切除术是安全的技术,但与钳压术相比,不能减少选择性肝切除术中的术中失血。

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