单孔腹腔镜、传统腹腔镜与常规开放阑尾切除手术的对比研究

目的比较经脐单孔腹腔镜、传统腹腔镜与常规开放阑尾切除手术的差别,探讨经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除手术的可行性。方法对广东省佛山市顺德区勒流医院2011年1月至2011年12月收治的183例急性阑尾炎病例,按照随机原则分单孔腹腔镜组（61例）、常规腹腔镜组（61例）和常规开放手术组（61例）,对三组的手术时间、术中出血量、肠道功能恢复时间、住院时间、并发症、中转率进行比较。结果单孔腹腔镜组、传统腹腔镜组的术中出血量、术后肠道功能恢复时间和住院时间少于常规开放组（P〈0．01）;常规开放手术组有1例术后出现切口感染,单孔腹腔镜组3例中转传统腹腔镜手术。对单纯性和化脓性阑尾炎,三种手术方式所需手术时间比较无显著性差异（P〉0．05）;对坏疽性（穿孔性）阑尾炎,单孔腹腔镜组的手术时间明显长于传统腹腔镜和常规开放组（P〈0．01）。结论单孔腹腔镜组、传统腹腔镜组与常规开放组比较在术中出血量、术后肠道功能恢复时间和术后住院时间方面具有优势,单孔腹腔镜组需要更多的手术时间;针对手术时间的进一步分析显示,对于单纯性阑尾炎和化脓性阑尾炎三组之间差异无统计学意义,对于坏疽性阑尾炎传统腹腔镜组更具优势。     

急性化脓性阑尾炎腹腔镜阑尾切除术的效果

目的分析急性化脓性阑尾炎腹腔镜阑尾切除术的效果。方法将70例急性化脓性阑尾炎患者随机分为2组,每组35例。对照组实施开腹阑尾切除术,观察组实施腹腔镜阑尾切除术。比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、术后胃肠功能恢复时间、并发症发生率及住院时间等指标。结果 2组手术时间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组术中出血量、术后胃肠功能恢复时间、住院时间及并发症发生率均少于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性化脓性阑尾炎,创伤小、术后并发症少、恢复时间短,治疗效果好。     

经脐单孔与常规腹腔镜阑尾切除手术的比较研究

目的:探讨单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除手术的可行性。方法:对2011年1月—2011年12月收治的122例急性阑尾炎病例,按照随机原则分单孔腹腔镜组(61例)和常规腹腔镜组(61例),对两组的手术时间、术中出血量、肠道功能恢复时间、住院时间、并发症、中转率进行比较。结果:两组在术中出血量、术后肠道功能恢复时间、住院时间及术后并发症的比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),单孔腹腔镜组因粘连(2例)和腹膜后阑尾(1例)中转常规腹腔镜手术;坏疽性(穿孔性)阑尾炎的手术时间,单孔腹腔镜组明显长于常规腹腔镜组(P=0.004);单纯性阑尾炎和化脓性阑尾炎两组的手术时间无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:选择性对急性阑尾炎行单孔腹腔镜手术治疗是安全可行的;与常规腹腔镜比较,单孔腹腔镜治疗单纯性阑尾炎和化脓性阑尾炎同样具有恢复快、创伤小的优点,且比常规腹腔镜有更好的维护形体的效果。     

腹腔镜结合小切口手术处理急性复杂性穿孔性阑尾炎

随着腹腔镜技术的不断成熟,腹腔镜阑尾切除术从处理单纯性阑尾炎扩展到化脓性阑尾炎甚至阑尾穿孔等合并严重化脓性腹膜炎的病例,但是针对腹膜后阑尾、阑尾周围脓肿形成、阑尾根部与盲肠结合部坏疽等复杂阑尾炎和阑尾穿孔引起的急性化脓性腹膜炎的处理一直是外科微创手术的难点,对此     

急性化脓性阑尾炎不同手术方式疗效分析

目的 探讨急性化脓性阑尾炎应用不同手术方式的疗效体会.方法 总结腹腔镜治疗化脓性或坏疽性阑尾炎(LA)病例42例,开腹(OA)治疗50例的体会.结果 腹腔镜组(LA)未出现并发症,而开腹组(OA)术后出现8例(16%)并发症.结论 随着腹腔镜技术的不断完善成熟,应用腹腔镜治疗急性化脓性或坏疽性阑尾炎与传统开腹手术相比,...     

腹腔镜阑尾切除术对老年急性化脓性阑尾炎患者术中出血量及术后切口感染发生率的影响

目的探讨腹腔镜阑尾切除术对老年急性化脓性阑尾炎患者术中出血量及术后切口感染发生率的影响。方法按照不同手术方法将60例老年急性化脓性阑尾炎患者分为2组,各30例。对照组行传统开腹阑尾切除术,观察组采用腹腔镜阑尾切除术。比较2组治疗效果。结果观察组术中出血量、手术时间、肛门排气时间、术后VAS评分及并发症发生率均少于或短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗老年急性化脓性阑尾炎,术中出血量少,术后切口感染发生率低,有利于患者恢复。     

腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎的临床疗效观察

目的总结急性阑尾炎腹腔镜阑尾切除术的体会。方法随机将64例急性阑尾炎患者分为对照组和腹腔镜组2组,每组32例。对照组实施开腹阑尾切除术;腹腔镜组采用腹腔镜阑尾切除术,比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、术后排气时间及并发症发生率。结果 2组手术时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05),腹腔镜组术中出血量少于对照组,术后排气时间及术后并发症低于对照组,2组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜阑尾切除术治疗急性阑尾炎,创伤小,术后并发症低,患者恢复时间短,效果肯定。     

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗上消化道溃疡穿孔的对比研究

目的探讨腹腔镜与开腹修补上消化道溃疡穿孔的手术疗效。方法回顾性分析2001年1月至2008年12月我院急诊行消化性溃疡穿孔修补术119例（于腹腔镜下完成47例。传统开腹完成72例）的相关资料。比较两种手术的手术时间、术后恢复情况、平均住院时间等。结果2组患者手术时间及并发症发生率比较无差异：术后恢复情况、平均住院时间腹腔镜组优于开腹手术组（差异均有显著性）。结论腹腔镜手术修补具有创伤小、恢复快、并发症少、美容效果好等优点,是较理想的治疗上消化道溃疡急性穿孔手术方式。     

腹腔镜在急腹症中的应用

目的探讨腹腔镜诊断和治疗急性腹膜炎的有效性及优越性。方法回顾性分析2001年4月-2004年10月133例急性腹膜炎采用腹腔镜进行诊断及治疗的临床资料。结果胃十二指肠穿孔60例，急性胆囊炎15例，胆囊穿孔8例，乙状结肠穿孔2例，急性阑尾炎并穿孔35例，空肠憩室穿孔3例，小网膜孔疝1例，急性胰腺炎4例，原发性腹膜炎5例，诊断准确率达100％，并在腹腔镜下行相应的治疗。无任何并发症出现。结论腹腔镜在急性腹膜炎中的诊断率高，可避免较长时间的术前B超、CT等检查，直接对疾病进行微创治疗。     

腹腔镜阑尾切除术应注意的几个问题(附132例报告)

目的总结腹腔镜阑尾切除术（laparoscopic appendectomy,LA）治疗阑尾炎的经验。方法回顾性分析1999年8月至2006年8月我院行LA治疗的132例阑尾炎患者的临床资料,其中慢性阑尾炎急性发作19例,急性单纯性阑尾炎15例,急性化脓性阑尾炎93例,阑尾穿孔腹膜炎5例。结果2例中转开腹。130例成功完成LA,手术时间22～55min,平均30.5min;术中出血量2～10ml;住院2～12d,平均3.4d。术后出现早期炎性肠梗阻1例,经非手术治疗治愈。结论LA操作简便可行,操作得当可在基层医院推广。     

腹腔镜在小儿阑尾切除术中的应用价值及对C反应蛋白的影响

目的:探讨腹腔镜小儿阑尾切除术的应用价值及对患儿血清C反应蛋白的影响。方法:2016年1~12月为100例患儿行阑尾切除术。将其分为两组,观察组行腹腔镜阑尾切除术(n=48),对照组行开腹阑尾切除术(n=52),对比两组治疗效果。结果:观察组患儿术中指标(术中出血量、手术时间、切口长度、拔管时间、镇痛药物使用率)、术后指标(遗留瘢痕率、住院费用、胃肠功能恢复时间、进食时间、抗生素使用时间)、术后并发症(腹腔残余感染、切口感染、粘连性肠梗阻)发生率明显低于对照组(P0.05);两组患儿治疗前C反应蛋白浓度差异无统计学意义(P0.05);术后第1天、第3天观察组C反应蛋白浓度更低(P0.05)。结论:腹腔镜小儿阑尾切除术创伤小,康复快,并发症少,值得推荐。     

Open versus laparoscopic appendectomy. A prospective randomized comparison.

OBJECTIVE: The authors compare open and laparoscopic appendectomy in a randomized fashion with regard to length of operation, complications, hospital stay, and recovery time. METHODS: Adult patients (older than 14 years of age) with the diagnosis of acute appendicitis were randomized to either open or laparoscopic appendectomy over a 9-month period. All patients received preoperative antibiotics. The operative time was calculated as beginning with the incision and ending when the wound was fully closed. Patients that were converted from laparoscopic to open appendectomy were considered a separate group. Return to normal activity and work were determined by questioning during postoperative clinic, telephone, or mailed questionnaire. RESULTS: There was a total of 169 patients randomized, 88 to the open and 81 to the laparoscopic group. The groups were similar demographically. Of the 81 laparoscopic patients, 13 (16%) were converted to open. In the open group, 70 patients (79.5%) had acute appendicitis and 21 (23.9%) had perforative appendicitis. In the laparoscopic group, 62 patients (76.5%) had acute appendicitis and 10 (12.3%) had perforative appendicitis. There was no statistical difference in the return to activity or work between the laparoscopic and open groups. The operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (102.2 minutes vs. 81.7 minutes, p < 0.01). The hospital stay of 2.2 days in the laparoscopic group and 4.3 days in the open group was statistically (p = 0.007). There was no difference in the hospital stay for those with acute appendicitis (1.89 days vs. 2.61 days, p = 0.067) compared with those with a normal appendix but with pelvic inflammatory disease (1.1 days vs. 2.3 days, p = 0.11). There was a significant difference in patients with perforative appendicitis (1.5 days vs. 9.5 days, p < 0.01). The hospital cost for patients having laparoscopic appendectomy was $6077 and for an open appendectomy $7227 (p = 0.164). There were no increased complications associated with the laparoscopic technique. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic appendectomy is comparable to open appendectomy with regard to complications, hospital stay, cost, return to activity, and return to work. There was a greater operative time involved with the laparoscopic technique. Laparoscopic appendectomy does not offer any significant benefit over the open approach for the routine patient with appendicitis.     

A prospective randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy.

BACKGROUND. Laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible, but whether it confers any advantage to patients with acute appendicitis is not known. We performed a randomized controlled trial to compare results of laparoscopic and open appendectomy in patients with signs and symptoms suggesting acute appendicitis who were seen by one surgical team. METHODS. Sixty-two consecutive patients were randomized, 30 to laparoscopy and 32 to a classical open appendectomy. Postoperative recovery, complications, and return to normal activities were compared in the two groups. RESULTS. The laparoscopy group were discharged earlier (2.5 vs 3.8 days, p less than 0.01). Postoperative complications were more frequent after open appendectomy. Follow-up showed less pain, shorter bed stay at home, and faster return to work and sport after laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSIONS. This prospective randomized study shows that laparoscopic appendectomy is superior to open appendectomy in terms of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and return to normal activities and is recommended as the approach of choice in the management of acute appendicitis.     

腹腔镜两孔法逆行阑尾切除术临床体会

目的:探讨腹腔镜两孔法逆行阑尾切除术的可行性。方法:选择急性阑尾炎患者41例,分为实验组和对照组,实验组23例采用两孔法逆行阑尾切除术;对照组18例采用三孔法顺行切除阑尾。比较两组手术时间、术后康复时间和并发症的发生情况。结果:手术时间实验组短于对照组[(45±13)minvs.(58±18)min](P<0.001),其他指标无显著差异。结论:腹腔镜下两孔法逆行阑尾切除术安全可行,值得推广。     

腹腔镜治疗老年急性阑尾炎疗效对比分析

目的比较腹腔镜与开腹治疗老年（>60岁）以及中青年（18~60岁）急性阑尾炎效果,为腹腔镜治疗老年急性阑尾炎提供临床依据。 方法选择2015年1月至2017年1月昆明医科大学附属第二医院收治的老年急性阑尾炎患者160例,其中经腹腔镜治疗80例（老年腹腔镜组）,经开腹治疗80例（老年开腹组）,另选择同期腹腔镜治疗的中青年急性阑尾炎患者80例为对照（中青年腹腔镜组）,比较三组患者的治疗临床疗效。 结果(1)三组间的出院情况差异有统计学意义（χ²=68.913,P<0.001,α=0.05标准）,其中老年腹腔镜组优于老年开腹组（Z=5.868,P<0.001）,中青年腹腔镜组优于老年腹腔镜组（Z=6.259,P<0.001）。(2)三组术后并发症发生率差异有统计学意义（χ²=10.800,P=0.005）,以老年开腹组最高[36.2%（29/80）],中青年腹腔镜组最低[13.8%（11/80）]。(3)三组间住院时间、抗生素使用时间、白细胞水平差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,老年腹腔镜组和中青年腹腔镜组的术后排气时间显著短于老年开腹组,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）,老年患者术后恢复较慢。 结论与开腹比较,腹腔镜治疗老年急性阑尾炎具有恢复快、住院时间少、并发症少的优点,但比中青年患者术后排气时间易延迟,并发症高。老年急性阑尾炎患者优先推荐腹腔镜治疗,同时注意促进术后排气、减少并发症。     

Trends in utilization and outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy

BACKGROUND: Although a number of trials have analyzed the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy, the clinical advantages, and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic appendectomy in the management of acute and perforated appendicitis are still not clearly defined. The aim of this study was to examine utilization and outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy using a national administrative database of academic medical centers and teaching hospitals. METHODS: Using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes, we obtained data from the University HealthSystem Consortium Clinical Data Base for all patients who underwent appendectomy for acute and perforated appendicitis between 1999 and 2003 (n = 60,236). Trends in utilization of laparoscopic appendectomy were examined over the 5-year period. The outcomes of laparoscopic and open appendectomy were compared including length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission, complications, observed and expected (risk-adjusted) in-hospital mortality, and costs. RESULTS: Overall, 41,085 patients underwent open appendectomy and 19,151 patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. The percentage of appendectomy performed by laparoscopy increased from 20% in 1999 to 43% in 2003 (P <0.01). Compared with patients who underwent open appendectomy, patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy were more likely female, more likely white, had a lower severity of illness, and were less likely to have perforated appendicitis. Laparoscopic appendectomy was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (2.5 days vs 3.4 days), lower rate of 30-day readmission (1.0% vs 1.3%), and lower rate of overall complications (6.1% vs 9.6%). There was no significant difference in the observed to expected mortality ratio between laparoscopic and open appendectomy (0.5 vs 0.6, respectively). The mean cost per case was similar between the two groups (US$ 6,242 vs US$ 6,260). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of laparoscopic appendectomy at academic centers has increased more than two-fold between 1999 and 2003. Patients selected for laparoscopic appendectomy have less advanced appendicitis and have a shorter length of stay and fewer complications without increasing the inpatient care cost.     

Laparoscopic appendectomy. Initial experience in a teaching program.

From February 1990 to December 1991, 16 laparoscopic procedures were performed for right lower quadrant pain. There were nine men and seven women, aged 16 to 47 years (mean, 27.2 years). All procedures were performed by surgical chief residents with prior experience in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, first-assisted by an attending surgeon. The appendix was visualized and a definitive diagnosis was made in all patients. One patient with acute salpingitis underwent diagnostic laparoscopy only; two patients underwent laparotomy (perforated appendicitis, perforated diverticulitis). A fourth patient had an acute torsion of an ovarian cyst managed laparoscopically. Laparoscopic appendectomy was successfully performed in 12 patients (acute appendicitis, 9; fibrosis or chronic inflammation, 2; normal appendix, 1). Mean operative time for laparoscopic appendectomy was 95.7 minutes, and mean postoperative stay was 2.5 days. The authors conclude that operative time, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rates for laparoscopic appendectomy are acceptable. Within the context of a training program, laparoscopic appendectomy provides an opportunity for surgical residents to expand laparoscopic skills.     

腹腔镜治疗小儿阑尾炎148例分析

目的总结腹腔镜阑尾切除术（LA）治疗儿童阑尾炎的经验。方法回顾性分析2004年1月至2011年4月行LA治疗儿童阑尾炎患儿共148例,对比同期139例开腹阑尾切除术（OA）患儿临床资料,比较术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、术后住院时间、切口感染、置腹腔引流率、拔腹腔引流管时间、腹腔脓肿发生率、肠梗阻发生率、再次手术率差异、手术时间等指标。结果IA组与OA组比较,两组中术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、术后住院时间、切口感染、腹腔脓肿发生率、肠梗阻发生率、再次手术率差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;置腹腔引流率、拔腹腔引流管时间差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;LA组较OA组手术时间长,差异有统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论LA适于治疗各型儿童阑尾炎,安全有效,术后并发症少,美容效果佳,是阑尾炎治疗的一种较好的方法。     

Complicated Appendicitis: Laparoscopic or Conventional Surgery?

Background The surgical treatment of complicated appendicitis remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of laparoscopic appendectomy in the treatment of complicated appendicitis in comparison with open surgery. Methods We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent an appendectomy for complicated appendicitis between January 2001 and August 2005. Results We identified 98 patients with complicated appendicitis. Forty-eight patients underwent open appendectomy, 42 laparoscopic appendectomy, and 8 initial laparoscopy with conversion to open surgery. Older patients, patients with comorbidities, and female patients were more likely to have been offered a laparoscopic appendectomy. Operating time, time to solid oral intake, and time of hospital stay were prolonged in the laparoscopic group but not significantly. There was no mortality observed in either group, and the complication rate was similar in both groups. Conclusions Laparoscopic appendectomy is an acceptable procedure for complicated appendicitis, with the same rate of infectious complications as the conventional approach.     

腹腔镜阑尾切除与开腹阑尾切除术的对比研究及Meta分析

目的比较腹腔镜与开腹阑尾切除术对急性阑尾炎的疗效和手术安全性。方法收集2006年10月至2007年10月问120例急性阑尾炎患者进行前瞻性研究,随机分为两组,分别采用腹腔镜阑尾切除（LA）术式和开腹阑尾切除（OA）术式,对手术时间、术中出血量、术后胃肠功能恢复时间、止痛药物应用时间、开始进食时间、住院天数和术后并发症等指标进行比较分析。并对1996年1月至2008年12月期间的该类前瞻性随机对照研究（RCT）文献进行Meta分析,比较两种术式手术时间、住院天数和并发症等指标。结果本组资料表明,两组手术时间、出血量无明显差异,而LA组肠功能恢复时间、止痛药物应用时间、住院天数明显短于OA组,LA组手术并发症也少于OA组;Meta分析有6组资料纳入,LA住院天数和手术并发症少于OA组,而两组的手术时间无明显差异。结论腹腔镜阑尾切除术具有恢复时间短、术后疼痛轻、住院时间短和并发症发生率低等优点,值得推荐。