腹腔镜手术在急腹症诊治中的体会

普外科医师在急腹症的诊治过程中，经常遇到诊断一时难以明确而病情又不允许长时间观察等待，被迫采取开腹探察手术的情况。经常遇到诊断方向虽已明确，但又难以决策采取保守治疗或采取手术治疗的问题。以及在剖腹探察手术中发现诊断错误，或发现没有必要进行手术治疗，或手术切口设计不合理、切口过分延长等尴尬的局面。为了克服这些弊端，我科近2年内在借鉴同行经验的基础上，     

腹腔镜在外科急腹症诊治中的应用评价

目的 报道腹腔镜在外科急腹症中的应用效果。方法 22例急腹症患者首先使用腹腔镜探查，明确诊断，18例行腹腔镜直接手术，其中脾切除2例，肝裂伤修补2例，十二指肠穿孔修补加高选迷切3例，肠梗阻肠粘连松解1例，阑尾切除4例，胰腺炎胰包膜切开加引流2例，肠系膜血管裂伤行钛夹止血2例，腹膜炎置管引流2例，中转开腹手术4例。结果 18例腹腔镜手术获成功，无并发症发生，平均手术时间96min，出血量181ml，平均住院天数6d。结论 急腹症使用腹腔镜技术体现了微创外科的优点，是一种安全有效的方法。     

腹腔镜在急腹症诊治中的应用体会

目的 探讨腹腔镜在急腹症中的应用前景.方法 对18例诊断不明确的急腹症患者进行腹腔镜探查,15例腹腔镜下诊断明确并手术成功.3例在腹腔镜辅助下诊断明确另开腹完成手术.结果 18例均获成功,预后良好,无任何并发症发生,平均4～8d出院.结论 腹腔镜在诊断不明确的急腹症中具有独特的优势,既可明确诊断,又能独立或辅助完成手术.     

腹腔镜在急腹症诊治中的应用

目的:探讨腹腔镜技术诊治急腹症的应用价值。方法:回顾分析2010年8月至2011年12月为35例急腹症患者行腹腔镜探查及治疗的临床资料。结果:35例患者均获得确诊,其中3例中转开腹手术,余32例均于镜下完成治疗,无手术死亡病例及切口相关并发症发生。结论:腹腔镜手术不仅可明确诊断急腹症,还可指导治疗,提高了确诊率,降低了阴性剖腹探查率,具有安全性、准确性高、并发症少、手术死亡率低等优点,值得推广应用。     

腹腔镜在诊治急腹症中的应用

1996年至 2 0 0 2年我们为各类急腹症 115例应用腹腔镜探查和手术 ,效果良好 ,现总结报道如下。1　资料与方法1 1　临床资料　 115例中男 80例 ,女 35例。 16 ～78岁 ,平均 4 0岁。临床诊断急性胆囊炎 75例 ,急性阑尾炎 18例 ,急性重症胰腺炎 6例 ,急性肠梗阻 5例 ,腹部闭合性外伤 5例 ,卵巢囊肿破裂 3例 ,溃疡穿孔 2例 ,肝囊肿破裂 1例。1 2　手术方法　患者均用气管插管全麻 ,充CO2 行人工气腹。行LC 73例 ,中转开腹 1例 ,胆囊造瘘 2例。LA 18例 ,1例中转开腹。重症胰腺炎腹腔灌洗引流 6例。粘连松解 5例 ,其中 1例升结肠癌行右半结肠…     

腹腔镜在急腹症中的应用

急腹症的早期准确诊断、及时合理的治疗与其预后相关。盲目剖腹手术探查会使部分无需手术治疗的急腹症病人出现阴性结果,增加了病人的痛苦;盲目观察和保守治疗又往往会延误诊断而耽误最     

腹腔镜技术在急腹症诊治中的应用体会

目的探讨腹腔镜技术在急腹症诊治中的作用。方法回顾性分析笔者所在医院2008年10月至2011年12月期间收治的128例急腹症患者应用腹腔镜技术进行诊治的临床资料。结果 127例均明确诊断,1例十二指肠迟发性破裂腹腔镜探查漏诊,患者2 d后因腹痛剧烈而行剖腹探查术,发现为十二指肠破裂,确诊率为99.2%。103例(80.5%)于腹腔镜下完成手术,11例(8.6%)中转开腹手术,14例经腹腔镜检查明确诊断后行保守治疗。所有手术患者术后无严重并发症发生,全部患者均痊愈出院。平均手术时间为72 min(32～166 min);平均出血量为125 ml(20～230 ml);平均住院时间为5 d(3～12 d)。结论急腹症应用腹腔镜技术是一种十分安全有效的方法,具有诊断治疗一体化、创伤小、恢复快,住院时间短等优点。     

腹腔镜在急腹症诊治中的运用

外科急腹症是以腹痛为主,伴有上消化道及全身症状的疾病,具有起病急、病情重、病因复杂和发展变化快等特点。腹腔镜的运用使急腹症的诊断和治疗更具主动性,不仅能作出准确、及时的诊断,还能远距离操作,治疗原发病灶,使上述难题迎刃而解。更重要的是能彻底冲洗腹腔,...     

腹腔镜在外科急腹症诊治中的应用

目的:探讨腹腔镜技术在外科急腹症中的诊断与治疗价值。方法:回顾性分析了20例腹腔镜外科急腹症探查及疗效。结果:20例经腹腔镜探查全部明确诊断,17例免除开腹手术,所有病例均恢复顺利,无术后并发症及死亡。结论:急诊腹腔镜探查可以提高急腹症的确诊率,降低阴性剖腹探查率。     

腹腔镜在急腹症中的应用

目的 探讨腹腔镜技术在急腹症中的临床应用价值。方法 回顾性分析1995年10月。2005年12月，应用腹腔镜技术为118例急腹症患者实施腹腔镜手术治疗的临床资料。结果 手术及病理检查诊断证实，腹腔镜手术成功114例，中转开腹手术4例，无手术并发症。结论 腹腔镜技术在急腹症中的应用具有独特优点，既可以明确诊断又可同时进行治疗，治疗效果可靠，值得临床进一步推广应用。     

Bedside diagnostic laparoscopy in the intensive care unit: a 13-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Frequently, critically ill patients suffer from intraabdominal pathology, such as sepsis or ischemia, either as a cause of a critical illness or as a complication from another illness requiring an intensive care unit (ICU) admission. These complications are associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality (between 50% to 100%). The diagnosis of these problems can be difficult in these very ill patients because it may require transport of unstable patients to additional departments outside the ICU setting. One option in the diagnosis of these difficult patients is bedside laparoscopy, as it avoids patient transport, is very accurate, and maintains ICU monitoring. METHODS: From 1991 to 2003, 13 patients underwent bedside diagnostic laparoscopy in the ICU to diagnose intraabdominal pathology in critically ill patients. All the procedures were done at the bedside in the ICU with the patient under local anesthesia and intravenous sedation. RESULTS: Mean procedure time was 36 minutes (range, 17 to 55). Mean patient age was 75.5 years (range, 56 to 86). There were 8 males and 5 females. Forty-six percent of the patients were diagnosed with mesenteric necrosis and died within 48 hours with no further testing or procedures. One patient with massive fecal contamination died the same day. Thirty percent of patients had a normal intraabdominal examination; of these, 2 died of unrelated illnesses and 2 survived their nonabdominal illness. Fifteen percent were diagnosed with acute acalculous cholecystitis as a complication of their ICU illness, which resolved satisfactorily. No intraoperative complications occurred with the ICU procedure. CONCLUSION: Bedside diagnostic laparoscopy in the ICU is feasible, safe, and accurate in the assessment of possible intraabdominal problems in properly selected, critically ill patients.     

腹腔镜诊治小儿急腹症769例体会

目的探讨腹腔镜在小儿急腹症中应用的价值。方法对我院2005年1月至2011年1月的769例小儿急腹症行腹腔镜探查术病例资料进行回顾分析。结果术前确诊率86．22％（663／769）。术中确诊率99．74％（767／769）,2例消化道出血未能确诊,转院继续治疗。完全腹腔镜下进行治疗667例,手术时间25～132（37．3±12．6）min,手术成功率87．26％（671／769）。住院3～10d,平均5d。1例过敏性紫癜、2例大网膜血肿、1例肠系膜血肿术中无需进一步手术处理;5例中转开腹（1例脾破裂、2例消化道出血、1例肠系膜裂孔疝并嵌顿、1例慢性阑尾炎急性发作）;93例腹腔镜辅助切口完成手术。735例随访2～60个月,其中1例未能确诊的消化道出血死亡,另1例未能确诊的消化道出血失访。3例出现脐部线头反应,换药取出线头治愈。余病例无并发症发生。结论腹腔镜确诊率较高,有助于使急腹症患者得到及时、合理、有效的治疗。急诊腹腔镜手术不仅可以对腹部病变及时作出诊断和处理,而且可使一些患者避免不必要的剖腹手术。     

Use of diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic ultrasound in the management of upper gastrointestinal malignancy

Background: Despite various preoperative imaging methods, unnecessary laparotomy is still quite common in upper gastrointestinal surgery. There have been some studies demonstrating the use of diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic ultrasound in the detection of small peritoneal seedling and vascular encasement of major vessels respectively, and these are the findings often inadequately assessed by preoperative imaging. Objective: This is a study to evaluate the use of diagnostic laparoscopy and selective laparoscopic ultrasound in the management of upper gastrointestinal malignancy. Method: A prospective study was carried out during the period from January 1996 to December 1997. Patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancy underwent diagnostic laparoscopy and selective laparoscopic ultrasound before resection. The role of laparoscopic staging was evaluated according to the number of patients who avoided unnecessary laparotomy. Results: There were 159 patients of mean age 62.8 years diagnosed with upper gastrointestinal tumours during the study period. These patients had various upper gastrointestinal malignancies: gastric carcinoma (89), oesophageal carcinoma (27), hepatobiliary malignancy (26), peri‐ampullary carcinoma (15) and small bowel tumour (2). Routine diagnostic laparoscopy and selective laparoscopic ultrasound were carried out for these patients unless there were contraindications such as a history of previous upper gastrointestinal surgery or the patient required palliative procedure irrespective of resectability. There were 106 diagnostic laparoscopies and 42 laparoscopic ultrasounds performed. Unnecessary operations were avoided in 32 patients (30%) due to either diffuse carcinomatosis or locally advanced tumour with encasement of major vessels. The role of laparoscopic staging in avoiding unnecessary surgery was particularly pronounced in peri‐ampullary carcinoma (46%) and hepatobiliary malignancy (38%). Conclusion: In summary, diagnostic laparoscopy and selective laparoscopic ultrasound are useful in avoiding unnecessary laparotomy particularly in hepatobiliary and peri‐ampullary malignancy.      

Idiopathic segmental infarction of the greater omentum successfully treated by laparoscopy: Report of case

(Received for publication on Feb. 12, 1999; accepted on Nov. 11, 1999)     

Efficacy of routine laparoscopy for the acute abdomen

Background: Laparoscopic surgery of selected acute abdominal conditions has been shown to be highly effective. Therefore, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy of routine laparoscopic surgery for the acute abdomen. Methods: After appropriate investigations, patients with acute abdomen, with or without a specific diagnosis, were offered the options of either laparoscopic or open surgery. Postoperatively, we analyzed the outcome measures of diagnostic accuracy, complications, and operating time of laparoscopy. The hospital stays for our patients were compared to case-matched controls. Results: The accuracy of laparoscopic diagnosis is the same as laparotomy. The 62% of our patients who were managed totally laparoscopically required shorter hospitalization than the case-matched controls treated by open operation. Morbidity was not increased by laparoscopy in patients who required conversion to open operation. The additional cost of laparoscopy appeared modest. Conclusions: Routine laparoscopy for the acute abdomen is safe and accurate. Patients eligible for laparoscopic treatment also require less hospitalization time. Received: 3 April 1997/Accepted: 9 June 1997     

Diagnostic laparoscopy in the intensive care patient

Summary Evaluation of a potential acute abdomen in patients who require intensive care for concurrent medical/surgical problems is often difficult due to ambiguities in the physical exam and ancillary diagnostic tests. Between August 1990, and February 1992, 25 ICU patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy to evaluate a suspected acute intraabdominal process. Thirteen laparoscopies were negative, and 12 were positive. The overall accuracy for laparoscopy was 96% as confirmed by subsequent laparotomy, autopsy, or clinical course. Laparoscopic findings led to a change in management in nine patients (36%), leading to earlier exploration in four patients, and avoidance of laparotomy in five. No significant hemodynamic effects were noted during laparoscopy, and the procedure-related morbidity was low (8.0%).Diagnostic laparoscopy is a safe and accurate guide for managing the ICU patient with a suspected acute surgical abdomen. The use of laparoscopy can help avoid nontherapeutic laparotomy or confirm the need for operative intervention in these complex cases.     

The role of staging laparoscopy for intraabdominal cancers: an evidence-based review

Diagnostic laparoscopy is minimally invasive surgery for the diagnosis of intraabdominal diseases. The aim of this review is a critical examination of the available literature on the role of laparoscopy for the staging of intraabdominal cancers. A systematic literature search of English-language articles on MEDLINE, the Cochrane database of evidence-based reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects was performed for the period 1995–2006. The level of evidence in the identified articles was graded. The search identified and reviewed seven main categories that have received attention in the literature: esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, pancreatic cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary tract cancer, colorectal cancer, and lymphoma. The indications, contraindications, risks, benefits, diagnostic accuracy of the procedure, and its associated morbidity are discussed. The limitations of the available literature are highlighted, and evidence-based recommendations for the use of laparoscopy to stage intraabdominal cancers are provided.     

The role of diagnostic laparoscopy for acute abdominal conditions: an evidence-based review

Diagnostic laparoscopy is minimally invasive surgery for the diagnosis of intraabdominal diseases. This study aim was a critical examination of the available literature on the role of laparoscopy for the diagnosis and treatment of acute intraabdominal conditions. A systematic literature search of English-language articles on MEDLINE, the Cochrane database of evidence-based reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects was performed for the period 1995-2006. The level of evidence in the identified articles was graded. This review examines the role of diagnostic laparoscopy for acute nonspecific abdominal pain, trauma, and the acute abdomen experienced by the critically ill patient. The indications, contraindications, risks, benefits, diagnostic accuracy of the procedure, and associated morbidity are discussed. The limitations of the available literature are highlighted, and evidence-based recommendations for the use of diagnostic laparoscopy to determine acute intraabdominal conditions are provided.     

Current practice in the United Kingdom for the use of diagnostic laparoscopy in suspected acute appendicitis

Objective  Diagnostic laparoscopy is advocated in the management of patients with acute right iliac fossa pain. We asked consultant surgeons in the UK about their current use of this technique.
Method  A short anonymous questionnaire was sent to consultant surgeons from the ASGBI database. Information was sought on general surgical specialty, participation in the emergency surgical on-call rota, current practice regarding the use of diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with suspected acute appendicitis and on the management of an inflamed or noninflamed appendix. Statistical analysis was by means of χ² test.
Results  There were 161 eligible returns from 250 questionnaires (64%) and the proportion of consultants replying from each subspecialty was similar to membership numbers of subspecialty organizations. Most consultants (68%) performed diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. The majority (69%) reserved its use for women of reproductive age and 14% of respondents laparoscoped all patients with suspected appendicitis. Compared to nongastrointestinal (GI), GI surgeons were significantly more likely to perform diagnostic laparoscopy (75 vs 52%, P  = 0.008). In the case of an overtly inflamed appendix, 81% of respondents would remove it laparoscopically with significantly more GI surgeons following this course than nonGI surgeons ( P  = 0.04).
Conclusion  Despite good evidence on the benefits of diagnostic laparoscopy in certain patients with suspected acute appendicitis, there is significant variation in its use. This difference appears to be based upon subspecialty and may be as a result of increasing subspecialization.