小切口阑尾切除术与腹腔镜阑尾切除术的疗效比较被引量：2

Comparison of Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Small Incision Appendectomy

下载PDF

导出

摘要目的:探讨小切口阑尾切除术(OA)与腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)的临床疗效。方法:选择2011年3月-2013年3月收治的急性阑尾炎患者90例,据病情、适应症及患者意愿行LA(48例)和OA(42例),比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、肛门排气时间术、术后进食时间、下床活动时间、术后并发症、住院时间及治疗前后WBC和CRP水平等指标。结果:LA组的术中出血量、肛门排气时间、术后进食时间、下床活动时间、术后并发症、住院时间较OA组明显减少;两组患者术后WBC和CRP水平均低于治疗前,而且LA组治疗后的WBC和CRP水平均低于OA组。结论:LA具有创伤小、康复快、并发症少等优点,其临床疗效明显优于小切口阑尾切除术。 Objective： To explore clinical efficacy of small incision appendectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy. Method： 90 cases with acute appendicitis were divided into LA group （ 48 cases ） and OA group （ 42 cases ） . Operative time, blood lossamount of flatus surgery, postoperative feeding time, ambulation time, postoperative complications, length of stay, WBC and CHP levels before and after treatment were obsrved in two groups. Result： Blood loss, anal exhaust time, the postoperative feeding time, ambulation time, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay in LA group were significantly shorter than the OA group, and the differences were statistically significant （P〈0.05） . WBC and CRP levels in two group were lower than before treatment, and WBC and CRP levels in LA group after treatment were lower than the OA group after treatment. Conclusion： LA has merits of trauma, faster recovery, fewer complications and its clinical efficacy is superior to the small incision appendectomy.

作者唐东华罗黎明

机构地区湖南环境生物职业技术学院

出处《中国医学创新》 CAS 2013年第27期121-122,共2页 Medical Innovation of China

关键词小切口阑尾切除术腹腔镜阑尾切除术疗效 The small incision appendectomy Laparoscopic appendectomy Curative effect

分类号 R726.5 [医药卫生—儿科]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献10

1Vahdad M R, Troebs R B, Nissen M, et al. Laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in children has complication rates comparable with those of open appendectomy[J]. J Pediatr Surg, 2013, 48 ( 3 ) : 555-561.
2Impellizzeri P, Simona A, Grasso M, et al. Surgical Stress after Open and Transumbilieal Laparoseopic-Assisted Appendectomy in Children[J]. Eur J Pediatr Surg, 2013, 1 ( 1 ) : 35.
3Batajoo HHazra NK. Laparoseopie versus open appendectomy in acute appendicitis[J]. J Nepal Health Res Counc, 2012, 10 ( 22 ) : 239- 242.
4Yaghoubian A, Kaji AHLee SL. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: outcomes analysis[J]. Am Surg, 2012, 78 (10) : 1083-1086.
5Southgate E, Vousden N, Karthikesalingam A, et al. Laparoseopie vs open appendectomy in older patients[J]. Arch Surg, 2012, 147 ( 6 ) : 557-562.
6Markides G, Subar DRiyad K. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults with complicated appendicitis: systematic review and meta- analysis[J]. World J Surg, 2010, 34 ( 9 ) : 2026-2040.
7Saia M, Buja A, Baldovin T, et al. Trend, variability, and outcome of open vs. laparoseopic appendectomy based on a large administrative database[J]. Surg Endosc, 2012, 26 ( 8 ) : 2353-2359.
8Masoomi H, Mills S, Dolieh MO, et al. Comparison of outcomes of laparoseopie versus open appendectomy in children: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample ( NIS ), 2006-2008[J]. World J Surg, 2012, 36 (3) : 573-578.
9Khan MN, Fayyad T, Cecil TD, et al. Laparoseopic versus open appendectomy : the risk of postoperative infectious complications[J]. JSLS, 2007, 11 ( 3 ) : 363-367.
10Page AJ, Pollock JD, Perez S, et al. Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: an analysis of outcomes in 17, 199 patients using ACS/NSOIP[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2010, 14 ( 12 ) : 1955-1962.