4.6 Article

Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed with mini-instruments

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 90, 期 11, 页码 1345-1348

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4315

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The outcomes after traditional laparoscopic cholecystcetomy (LC; one 10-mm. port, one 12-mm port and two 5-mm ports) and minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC; three 3-mm ports and one 12-mm. port) for gallstone disease were compared. Methods: The study was a randomized, single-blind trial comparing LC with MLC. Only elective patients were eligible for inclusion. LC was a routine procedure at the institution in which the study was performed, whereas MLC was introduced after a short training period. The randomization period was from January to December 2001. Results: Of 175 patients who had elective minimal access cholecystectomy during the randomization period, 135 entered the trial: 68 underwent LC and 67 underwent MLC. The groups were matched for age, sex and preoperative characteristics. Median (range) operating times for LC and MLC were similar (45 (20-120) and 50 (20-170) min respectively). Intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, the time for the patient to resume walking, eating and passing stools, and median hospital stay were the same in the two groups. The level of postoperative pain was lower in the MLC group at 1 h (P = 0.011), 3 h (P = 0.012), 6 h (P = 0.003), 12 h (P = 0.052) and 24 h (P = 0.034). Patients who had MLC received fewer injections of analgesic (P = 0.036) and more patients in this group expressed satisfaction with the cosmetic result (P = 0.001). Conclusion: MLC took a similar time to perform and caused less postoperative pain than the standard laparoscopic procedure. Reducing the port size further enhanced the advantages of laparoscopic over open cholecystectomy.

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

4.6
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