4.4 Article

Surgical Management of Hirschsprung's Disease: A Comparative Study Between Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery, Transumbilical Single-Site Laparoscopic Surgery, and Robotic Surgery

Journal

FRONTIERS IN SURGERY
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.924850

Keywords

hirschsprung's disease; children; conventional laparoscopic surgery; transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic surgery; robotic surgery

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the short-term efficacy of three surgical methods for Hirschsprung's disease. The results showed that TU-LESS and CLS had shorter operation duration compared to RS, and TU-LESS achieved the most aesthetic effect.
Background: Hirschsprung's disease (HD) is a commonly digestive malformation in children that usually requires surgery. This study aims to evaluate the short-term efficacy of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic surgery (TU-LESS), and robotic surgery (RS) in the treatment of Hirschsprung's disease. Methods: 90 patients with Hirschsprung's disease undergone laparoscopic surgery at our center between 2015 and 2019, divided into three groups (group CLS, TU-LESS and RS), were retrospectively analysed. Results: CLS and TU-LESS group showed no significant difference in operation duration (P > 0.05) but shorter operation duration than the RS group (P < 0.05). RS group had highest overall SCAR scores, while TU-LESS group had the lowest one (P < 0.05). Other parameters such as operative blood loss, hospital stays, recovery time of digestive function, postoperative complications had no significant difference among the three groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The three surgical methods for HD revealed similar efficacy, where TU-LESS and CLS spent less time than RS; TU-LESS led to the most aesthetic effect, followed by CLS and RS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available