首页> 外文期刊>Journal of minimally invasive gynecology >Mini-Laparotomy Versus Laparoscopy for Gynecologic Conditions
【24h】

Mini-Laparotomy Versus Laparoscopy for Gynecologic Conditions

机译:妇科病情剖腹术与腹腔镜检查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Study Objective: To compare conversion rates, operative time, and estimated blood loss in patients undergoing mini-laparotomy (<4 cm vertical or transverse abdominal incision) versus laparoscopy for treatment of benign gynecologic conditions. Design: Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). Setting: Academic medical center. Patients: Women who underwent laparoscopy or mini-laparotomy for treatment of gynecologic conditions from January 2002 to March 2011. Patients who underwent hysterectomy as part of the surgery, cancer staging procedure, pregnancy-related procedure, or diagnostic surgery alone were excluded. Interventions: Mini-laparotomy or laparoscopy. Measurement and Main Results: Primary outcomes were operative time and estimated blood loss. Secondary outcomes were hospital readmission, repeat operation, overnight hospital admission, emergency room visits because of surgery-related signs or symptoms, and wound complications. Of 950 medical records examined, 493 patients (52%) met the inclusion criteria, of which 141 (29%) underwent mini-laparotomy and 352 (71%) underwent laparoscopy. The groups had similar indications for surgery and level of surgical assistant. Patients who underwent mini-laparotomy were older than those who underwent laparoscopy. In patients who underwent mini-laparotomy, mean operative time was significantly shorter (49.3 versus 91.5 minutes; p =.003), and estimated blood loss was less (20 versus 32 mL; p =.001). The cumulative secondary outcome rate was not statistically different between the 2 groups (15% versus 16%). When each secondary outcome (conversion, repeat operation, overnight hospital admission, readmission to the hospitalization, emergency department visit, and wound complication) was examined independently, only the wound complication rate was significantly higher in the mini-laparotomy group compared with the laparoscopy group (5 of 141 patients versus 1 of 352 patients; p =.008). Conclusions: Mini-laparotomy is a safe alternative to traditional minimally invasive approaches in gynecology and offers the additional benefits of shorter intraoperative time and less blood loss; however, it is associated with a significantly higher rate of major wound complications. Mini-laparotomy is an important surgical approach and should be included in gynecologic surgical training.
机译:研究目的:比较进行小型腹腔镜开腹术(垂直或横向腹部切口<4 cm)与腹腔镜手术治疗良性妇科疾病的患者的转化率,手术时间和估计的失血量。设计:回顾性研究(加拿大工作组II-2级)。地点:学术医学中心。患者:2002年1月至2011年3月接受腹腔镜或小型腹腔镜手术治疗妇科疾病的妇女。不包括作为手术,癌症分期程序,妊娠相关程序或诊断性手术一部分进行子宫切除术的患者。干预措施:迷你腹腔镜或腹腔镜检查。测量和主要结果:主要结果是手术时间和估计的失血量。次要结果是再次入院,重复手术,通宵住院,因手术相关的体征或症状而去急诊室以及伤口并发症。在检查的950份病历中,有493例(52%)符合纳入标准,其中141例(29%)接受了小型腹腔镜开腹术,352例(71%)进行了腹腔镜检查。这些组的手术适应症和手术助手的水平相似。进行小型腹腔镜手术的患者比进行腹腔镜手术的患者大。在接受小型腹腔镜手术的患者中,平均手术时间明显缩短(49.3比91.5分钟; p = .003),并且估计失血量更少(20比32 mL; p = .001)。两组的累积次要结局发生率无统计学差异(15%对16%)。当独立检查每项次要结局(转换,重复手术,入院过夜,再次住院,急诊就诊和伤口并发症)时,与腹腔镜检查组相比,迷你腹腔镜手术组仅伤口并发症发生率显着更高(141名患者中有5名患者,而352名患者中有1名患者; p = .008)。结论:迷你腹腔镜手术是妇科传统微创方法的安全替代方法,并具有缩短术中时间和减少失血的额外优势。然而,它与严重伤口并发症的发生率显着相关。小型开腹手术是重要的手术方法,应包括在妇科手术培训中。

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