...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of laparoendoscopic and advanced surgical techniques, Part A >The safety of direct trocar versus veress needle for laparoscopic entry: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
【24h】

The safety of direct trocar versus veress needle for laparoscopic entry: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

机译:腹腔镜直接穿刺与穿刺针的安全性:一项随机临床试验的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Objective: This study assessed the safety of direct trocar insertion (DTI) versus Veress needle followed by primary trocar insertion (VN). Methods: Ovid MEDLINE ?, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Scopus, and the reference lists of published articles were searched up to September 2011 to identify randomized clinical trials comparing DTI with VN. This meta-analysis was restricted to randomized studies comparing the safety of these two laparoscopic entry techniques. Results: Seven randomized studies consisting of 2940 women (VN, n=1525; DTI, n=1415) were identified. The data on the safety of two entry techniques were abstracted, integrated, and analyzed with the meta-analysis method and are presented as pooled relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). There were 4 cases of a major complication in the VN group in contrast to none in the DTI group. Pooled results failed to show a statistically significant difference in the risk of major complications between the two groups. A significantly higher risk of minor complications was detected in the VN group (RR [95% CI]=10.78 [6.27-18.51]). Among minor complications, preperitoneal injuries (46.73 [11.55-189.10]) and omental injuries (4.51 [2.12-9.62]) were the two most common complications in the VN group. There were significantly increased risks of multiple insertions (more than two attempts) (2.99 [2.11-4.23]) and failed entry (2.21[1.07-4.56]) in the VN group. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that the commonly used VN entry technique carries a significantly increased risk of minor complications. In addition, the likelihood of multiple insertions and failed entry are significantly higher in the VN group.
机译:目的:本研究评估了直接套管针插入(DTI)与Veress针头再进行主要套管针插入(VN)的安全性。方法:搜索直到2011年9月为止的OvidMEDLINE®,Cochrane库,Google Scholar,Scopus和已发表文章的参考文献清单,以鉴定比较DTI和VN的随机临床试验。这项荟萃分析仅限于比较这两种腹腔镜进入技术安全性的随机研究。结果:七项随机研究由2940名女性组成(VN,n = 1525; DTI,n = 1415)。使用荟萃分析方法对两种进入技术的安全性数据进行了抽象,集成和分析,并以95%置信区间(CI)的合并相对风险(RR)表示。与DTI组相比,VN组有4例严重并发症。汇总结果未能显示出两组之间发生重大并发症的风险在统计学上有显着差异。在VN组中,发现轻微并发症的风险明显较高(RR [95%CI] = 10.78 [6.27-18.51])。在轻度并发症中,腹膜前损伤(46.73 [11.55-189.10])和网膜损伤(4.51 [2.12-9.62])是VN组中最常见的两种并发症。 VN组中多次插入(两次以上尝试)(2.99 [2.11-4.23])和输入失败(2.21 [1.07-4.56])的风险显着增加。结论:这项荟萃分析表明,常用的VN进入技术显着增加了轻微并发症的风险。此外,VN组中多次插入和输入失败的可能性明显更高。

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