首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American College of Surgeons >Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy
【24h】

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

机译:单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术与改善美容评分相关,但疝气发生率明显升高:传统的多端口腹腔镜胆囊切除术与单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术的前瞻性随机,多中心,单盲试验的一年结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Minimally invasive techniques have become an integral part of general surgery with recent investigation into single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC). This study presents the final 1-year results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of SILC vs multiport cholecystectomy (4PLC). Study Design: Patients with biliary colic and documented gallstones or polyps or with biliary dyskinesia were randomized to SILC vs 4PLC. Data measures included operative details, adverse events, and conversion to 4PLC or laparotomy. Patients were followed for 12 months. Results: Two hundred patients underwent randomization to SILC (n = 119) or 4PLC (n = 81). Enrollment ranged from 1 to 50 patients with 4 sites enrolling >25 patients. Total adverse events were not significantly different between groups (36% 4PLC vs 45% SILC; p = 0.24), as were severe adverse events (4% 4PLC vs 10% SILC; p = 0.11). Incision-related adverse events were higher after SILC (11.7% vs 4.9%; p = 0.13), but all of these were listed as mild or moderate. Total hernia rates were 1.2% (1 of 81) in 4PLC patients vs 8.4% (10 of 119) in SILC patients (p = 0.03). At 1-year follow-up, cosmesis scores continued to favor SILC (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Results of this trial show SILC to be a safe and feasible procedure when compared with 4PLC, with similar total adverse events but with an identified significant increase in hernia formation. Cosmesis scoring and patient preference at 12 months continue to favor SILC, and more than half of the patients were willing to pay more for a single-site surgery over a standard laparoscopic procedure. Additional longer-term population-based studies are needed to clarify if this increased rate of hernia formation as compared with 4PLC will continue to hold true.
机译:背景:随着近期对单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)的研究,微创技术已成为普外科不可或缺的一部分。这项研究显示了SILC与多端口胆囊切除术(4PLC)的前瞻性,随机,多中心,单盲试验的最终1年结果。研究设计:将胆绞痛并有胆结石或息肉或胆道运动障碍的患者随机分为SILC vs 4PLC。数据指标包括手术细节,不良事件以及改用4PLC或剖腹手术。随访患者12个月。结果:200例患者接受了SILC(n = 119)或4PLC(n = 81)的随机分组。招募范围为1至50名患者,其中4个地点招募的> 25名患者。各组之间的总不良事件无显着差异(36%4PLC vs 45%SILC; p = 0.24),严重不良事件(4%4PLC vs 10%SILC; p = 0.11)。 SILC后与切口相关的不良事件较高(11.7%对4.9%; p = 0.13),但所有这些均被列为轻度或中度。 4例PLC患者的总疝气率为1.2%(81分之1),而SILC患者的总疝气率为8.4%(119分之10)(p = 0.03)。在1年的随访中,美容评分继续偏爱SILC(p <0.0001)。结论:该试验的结果表明,与4PLC相比,SILC是一种安全可行的方法,具有相似的总不良事件,但已发现疝气形成明显增加。美容评分和患者在12个月时的偏爱继续支持SILC,超过一半的患者愿意为标准腹腔镜手术的单部位手术支付更多费用。需要进一步的基于人群的长期研究来阐明与4PLC相比,这种增加的疝气形成率是否将继续成立。

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