[1]谢炜,肖林康,张雷,等.单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除对胆囊良性疾病的疗效对比分析[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2015,37(19 ):1989-1992.
 Xie Wei,Xiao Linkang,Zhang Lei,et al.Clinical outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy[J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2015,37(19 ):1989-1992.
点击复制

单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除对胆囊良性疾病的疗效对比分析(/HTML )
分享到:

陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报)[ISSN:1000-5404/CN:51-1095/R]

卷:
37卷
期数:
2015年第19期
页码:
1989-1992
栏目:
论著
出版日期:
2015-10-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Clinical outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
作者:
谢炜肖林康张雷孙安仁傅翔
重庆市人民医院肝胆外科
Author(s):
Xie Wei Xiao Linkang Zhang Lei Sun Anren Fu Xiang

Department of General Surgery, Chongqing People’s Hospital, Chongqing, 400013, China

关键词:
单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术胆囊良性疾病
Keywords:
single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy
分类号:
R572; R675.405
文献标志码:
A
摘要:

目的      比较单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, SILC)与传统三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, TPLC)治疗胆囊良性疾病的安全性及有效性。       方法      我科于2011年6月至2013年4月因胆囊良性疾病行腹腔镜胆囊切除术116例,其中45例患者行SILC,71例患者行TPLC,对比分析两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、并发症发生率、疼痛评分、中转开腹率和美容效果满意度。      结果      两组患者年龄、性别、体质量指数等方面比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。SILC组患者手术时间明显长于TPLC组(P<0.05);SILC组与TPLC组术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者术后住院时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后第1天疼痛评分SILC组明显高于TPLC组(P<0.05)。两组术后并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。SILC组美容效果满意度明显高于TPLC组(P<0.05)。      结论      单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗胆囊良性疾病安全、有效,较传统三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术美容效果好,但手术时间稍长于传统腹腔镜手术。

Abstract:

Objective      To evaluate the safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus 3- port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (TPLC) in the treatment of benign gallbladder diseases.       Methods        A total of 116 patients with benign gallbladder diseases administered in our department from June 2011 to April 2013 were retrospectively recruited in this study. Forty-five of them undergoing SILC were assigned into group SILC, and 71 patients receiving TPLC into group TPLC. There were no significant differences in age, sex, or body mass index among the 2 groups (P>0.05). Operative time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, incidence of complications, pain score, laparotomy rate, and satisfaction with cosmetic results were analyzed and compared between the 2 groups.       Results      Operation time was significantly longer in the group SILC than the group (P<0.05). There was no statistical significances in the amount of intraoperative bleeding and postoperative staying time between the 2 groups (P>0.05). The pain scores were higher in the group SILC than the group TPLC in postoperative day 1 (P<0.05), but no difference was seen in the incidence of complications. Obvious higher cosmetic satisfaction was seen in the group SILC (P<0.05).       Conclusion      SILC is a safe and efficient approach for surgical treatment of benign gallbladder diseases. It is superior to TPLC because of its better cosmetic results, but takes longer of operation time.

相似文献/References:

[1]黄建,谢伟,孙安仁,等.经皮胆囊穿刺造瘘处理高危急性胆囊炎53例分析[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2007,29(13):1351.
 HUANG Jian,XIE Wei,SUN An-ren,et al.Percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis in 53 high-risk patients[J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2007,29(19 ):1351.
[2]郑小东,马海,杨红春.腹腔镜胆囊切除术中Calot三角解剖的技巧[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2006,28(15):1594.
[3]谭平,段敏.针对老年腹腔镜胆囊切除术并存疾病患者的围手术期护理[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2006,28(08):791.
[4]王洪平,余华.32例胆源性胰腺炎腹腔镜胆囊切除术的体会[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2004,26(22):0.[doi:10.16016/j.1000-5404.2004.22.035 ]
[5]何谦,李智华,王铁虎,等.兔胆囊切除术后Oddi括约肌离体运动功能的变化[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2008,30(23):2245.
[6]李军尧,陈忠庆,刘非凡,等.胆囊切除术中胆囊管变异类型的分析及处理[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2004,26(09):0.[doi:10.16016/j.1000-5404.2004.09.041 ]
[7]喻明建.腹腔镜胆囊切除术1412例分析[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2004,26(24):0.[doi:10.16016/j.1000-5404.2004.24.043 ]
[8]陈平,韩本立,何振平,等.胆囊切除术后左股静脉血栓形成一例[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),1995,17(05):0.[doi:10.16016/j.1000-5404.1995.05.009 ]
[9]陈玉迁,张铭,聂发传,等.腹腔镜胆囊切除病人术中血浆肾素活性和血管紧张素浓度变化[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),1994,16(04):0.[doi:10.16016/j.1000-5404.1994.04.028 ]
[10]李军尧,陈忠庆,刘非凡,等.胆囊切除术后黄疸的诊断与治疗[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2003,25(17):0.[doi:10.16016/j.1000-5404.2003.17.023 ]

更新日期/Last Update: 2015-09-28