4.0 Article

Rationale and surgical technique of laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy using endoscopic staples

期刊

出版社

KOREAN SURGICAL SOCIETY
DOI: 10.4174/astr.2014.87.2.66

关键词

Laparoscopy; Hepatectomy; Surgical staples

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) has been widely accepted due to benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Some surgeons prefer to isolate glissonian pedicles to segments II and III and to control individual pedicles with surgical clips, whereas opt like to control glissonian pedicles simultaneously using endoscopic stapling devices. The aim of this study was to find the rationale of LLLS using endoscopic staples. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed and compared the clinical outcomes (operation time, drainage length, transfusion, hospital stay, and complication rate) of 35 patients that underwent LLLS between April 2004 and February 2012. Patients were dichotomized by surgical technique based on whether glissonian pedicles were isolated and controlled (the individual group, n = 21) or controlled using endoscopic staples at once (the batch group, n = 14). Results: Mean operation time was 265.3 +/- 21.3 minutes (mean standard deviation) in the individual group and 170 +/- 22.9 minutes in the batch group. Operation time in the batch group was significantly shorter than the individual group (P = 0.007). Mean drainage length was 4.8 +/- 1.6 and 2.6 +/- 1.5 days in the individual and the batch group. There was significantly shorter in the batch group, also (P = 0.006). No transfusion was required in the batch group, but 4 patients in the individual group needed transfusion. Mean hospital stay was 10.7 +/- 1.1 and 9.4 +/- 0.8 days in the individual and the batch groups (P = 0.460). There were no significant complications or mortality in both groups. Conclusion: LLLS using endoscopic staples (batch group) was found to be an easier and safer technique without morbidity or mortality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据