切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (06): 367 -371. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6899.2020.06.011

所属专题: 文献资源库

论著 上一篇    下一篇

腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术的疗效分析
张鑫 1, 张磊 1, 赵淑萍 1 , ( )   
  1. 1. 266000 青岛大学附属青岛妇女儿童医院妇科中心
  • 收稿日期:2020-07-30 出版日期:2020-12-30
  • 通信作者: 赵淑萍

Effect of abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS in ovarian cystectomy

Xin Zhang 1, Lei Zhang 1, Shuping Zhao 1 , ( )   

  1. 1. Department of Gynecology, Qingdao Women and Children′s Hospital Affiliated to Qingdao University, Qingdao 266000, China
  • Received:2020-07-30 Published:2020-12-30
  • Corresponding author: Shuping Zhao
目的

探讨腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术的疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2018年1月至2019年2月于青岛大学附属青岛妇女儿童医院行微创卵巢囊肿剥除术145例患者的临床资料,其中50例行腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术(腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组)、45例行单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术(单孔组)、50例行多孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术(多孔组)。比较3组的一般资料、术中指标、术后指标及围手术期并发症。

结果

腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组、单孔组、多孔组患者的手术时间分别为(53.3±6.5)min 、(70.8±6.6)min、(52.3±6.2)min,腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组的手术时间短于单孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001);腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组与多孔组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组、单孔组、多孔组患者的住院费用分别为(11 850.7±142.2)元、(12 934.6±138.9)元、(11 883.1±131.9)元,腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组的住院费用低于单孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001);腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组与多孔组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组、单孔组、多孔组患者的术后24 h疼痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale, VAS)分别为(2.0±0.8)分、(1.9±0.7)分、(2.5±0.8)分,腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组的术后24 h VAS低于多孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001);腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组与单孔组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组、单孔组、多孔组患者的术后1个月切口美容评分(cosmetic score, CS)分别为(21.1±0.9)分、(21.1±0.9)分、(17.5±0.6)分,腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组的术后1个月CS高于多孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001);腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔组与单孔组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.999)。3组患者的术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、术后住院时间、术后1个月术后体象量表评分及围手术期并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义。

结论

腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术是安全、可行的,与单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术比较,具有手术时间缩短、住院费用降低的优势;与多孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术比较,具有减轻疼痛、美观的优势;可作为一种符合经济效益的手术方式在基层医院推广应用。

Objective

To explore the effect of abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS in ovarian cystectomy.

Methods

Retrospectively collected the clinical data of 145 patients who underwent minimally invasive ovarian cystectomy at Qingdao Women and Children′s Hospital Affiliated to Qingdao University from Jan. 2018 to Feb. 2019.50 of them underwent abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS in ovarian cystectomy(the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group), 45 of them underwent LESS in ovarian cystectomy(the LESS group), and 50 of them underwent muiti-port laparoscopic surgery in ovarian cystectomy(the multi-port group). The general data, intraoperative indicators, postoperative indicators and perioperative complication were compared in the three groups.

Results

The operation time of the three groups was [(53.3±6.5)min vs (70.8±6.6)min vs (52.3±6.2) min]. The operation time of the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group was shorter than the LESS group and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001) .The difference between the abdominal wall suture foecep assisted LESS group and the multi-port group was no statistically significant(P>0.05). The hospital cost of the three groups was [(11 850.7±142.2)RMB vs (12 934.6±138.9)RMB vs (11 883.1±131.9)RMB]. The hospital cost of the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group was lower than the LESS group and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The difference between the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group and the multi-port group was no statistically significant (P>0.05). The VAS at 24 hour after surgery of the three groups was [(2.0±0.8) vs (1.9±0.7) vs (2.5±0.8)]. The VAS at 24 hour after surgery of the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group was lower than the multi-port group and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The difference between the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group and the LESS group was no statistically significant(P>0.05). The CS at 1 month after surgery of the three groups was [(21.1±0.9) vs (21.1±0.9) vs (17.5±0.6)]. The CS at 1 month after surgery of the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group was higher than the multi-port group and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The difference between the abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS group and the LESS group was no statistically significant (P>0.999). The difference of the intraoperative blood loss, the postoperative anal exhaust time, the postoperative hospital stay, the BIS at 1 month after surgery and the rate of perioperative complication in the three groups was no statistically significant.

Conclusions

The abdominal wall suture forcep assisted LESS in ovarian cystectomy is safe and feasible. Compared with the LESS in ovarian cystectomy, it has the advantages of shorter operation time and lower hospital cost. Compared with the muiti-port laparoscopic surgery in ovarian cystectomy, it has the advantages of relieving pain and aesthetics. It can be promoted as an economical surgery method in basic hospitals.

图1 腹壁缝合钳辅助单孔手术入路
图2 腹壁缝合钳
图3 单孔手术入路
图4 多孔手术入路
表1 三组微创卵巢囊肿剥除术患者的一般资料比较
表2 三组微创卵巢囊肿剥除术患者的术中指标比较( ±s)
表3 三组微创卵巢囊肿剥除术患者的术后指标比较( ±s)
1
龚瑶,周容,代雪林,等.自制入路通道单孔腹腔镜手术治疗妇科良性疾病60例临床分析[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2019,35(3):330-333.
2
李珺玮,陈义松,华克勤.单孔腹腔镜在妇科良性疾病中的应用[J].实用妇产科杂志,2019,35(3):170-172.
3
Fader AN, Cohen S, Escobar PF,et al.Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in gynecology[J].Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol,2010,22(4):331-334.
4
孙大为.妇科单孔腹腔镜手术学[M].北京:北京大学医学出版社,2015,111.
5
孙大为,张颖.单孔腹腔镜手术在异位妊娠诊治中的应用[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2017,33(9):903-906.
6
熊光武.妇科单孔腹腔镜手术器械选择[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2019,35(12):1324-1326.
7
马迎春.单孔腹腔镜技术在妇科手术中的应用:优势、并发症与难点探讨[J].山东大学学报(医学版),2019,57(12):31-36.
8
Antoniou SA, Morales-Conde S, Antoniou GA,et al.Single-incision laparoscopic surgery through the umbilicus is associated with a higher incidence of trocar-site hernia than conventional laparoscopy:a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J].Hernia,2016,20(1):1-10.
9
施艳军,徐流凤,闵玲,等. "定锚法"脐部整形在单孔腹腔镜术中的应用[J/CD].实用妇科内分泌杂志(电子版),2018,5(36):4-6.
10
王丹莹,刘海元,史宏晖,等.不同腹壁通道在单孔腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剔除术中的应用[J].生殖医学杂志,2017,26(7):689-693.
11
李帅,汤绍涛,李康,等.腹腔镜下免Trocar放入微型操作钳治疗小儿腹股沟斜疝[J].中华小儿外科杂志,2014,35(6):432-434.
12
王元,董春林,余进进,等.疝气钳在妇科良性疾病腹腔镜手术中的应用[J].中外医学研究,2017,15(34):169-171.
13
华玉蓉,张阳,蔡钱根.经脐入路单孔腹腔镜下妇科良性病变手术的难点及技巧探讨[J].江苏医药,2011,37(22):2708-2709.
14
李琦,吴海滨.经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术与传统三孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术的疗效比较[J].临床肝胆病杂志,2017,33(9):1758-1761.
[1] 张新梅, 赵华巍, 夏宇, 张一休, 戴晴, 姜玉新. 胎儿卵巢囊肿产前超声图像特点及预后评估[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2021, 18(05): 444-450.
[2] 王玉, 盛洁, 靳灵鸽, 蒋子文, 卢丹. 不同止血方式对腹腔镜下卵巢子宫内膜异位囊肿剥除术后卵巢储备功能的影响[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 17(04): 420-424.
[3] 唐明鸣, 李林, 李征宇. 采用传统腹腔镜器械开展经脐单孔腹腔镜手术技术在妇科手术中的应用现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(05): 504-509.
[4] 曲思娆, 赵曼曼, 李全红, 李芳, 马晶晶, 张义男, 景思然, 孙建丽. 无气腹V-NOTES与传统腹腔镜治疗卵巢囊肿临床疗效比较[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 217-220.
[5] 朱可安, 陈灵, 李昭, 黄薇. 应用单孔腹腔镜开展常见妇科手术的可行性探讨[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(03): 158-162.
[6] 金贝贝, 张玉泉, 李季, 高赛楠, 朱春玉, 丁晓颖, 杨晓清. 普通及机器人辅助经脐单孔腹腔镜在子宫肌瘤剔除术中的应用比较[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(03): 163-167.
[7] 徐晓钢, 曾纪晓, 刘斐, 兰梦龙, 陶波圆, 林玉珍. 经脐单孔3D腹腔镜手术治疗小儿先天性胆总管囊肿[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(03): 172-176.
[8] 朱一萍, 隋孟松, 郑真真, 吉梅, 张彦丽, 孙静. 经阴道自然腔道腹腔镜卵巢囊肿剥除术的学习曲线[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(02): 85-89.
[9] 曹言言, 彭仁国, 文芳, 訾聃. 单孔腹腔镜对Ⅰ期子宫内膜癌手术患者疼痛及负性情绪的影响分析[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(02): 90-96.
[10] 秦真岳, 王慧慧, 陈继明, 鲍明月, 郑亚峰, 肖惠超, 马洋, 蒋云芬, 施如霞. 单孔腹腔镜手术治疗Ⅲ型(包块型)子宫瘢痕妊娠[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(02): 122-126.
[11] 王永鹏, 孙大为. 单孔腹腔镜手术治疗妊娠早期子宫圆韧带肌瘤一例[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(02): 116-118.
[12] 周容, 令狐华, 代雪林, 代凤琴, 龚瑶. 经脐单孔腹腔镜在晚期卵巢恶性肿瘤初始评估及活检中的应用[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(01): 33-36.
[13] 杨鑫, 沈杨, 徐敬云, 丁波. 经脐单孔腹腔镜在不同类型全子宫切除术应用[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(05): 274-277.
[14] 张守枫, 秦真岳, 陈继明, 张文笛, 余红霞, 鲍明月, 王慧慧, 肖惠超, 曹颖, 郑亚峰, 蒋云芬, 施如霞. V-NOTES术后足月妊娠经阴道分娩成功案例报告[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(05): 297-300.
[15] 王亚雯, 郑莹. 经脐单孔腹腔镜治疗意外子宫内膜间质肉瘤一例报告[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(05): 301-304.
阅读次数
全文


摘要