腹腔镜阑尾切除术与开放复杂的阑尾炎患儿三级教学医院
背景:急性阑尾炎是最常见的儿童外科急救。好的结果与腹腔镜appendecto已报告——我在孩子简单的阑尾炎(LA)。但腹腔镜的使用复杂的动作——儿童dicitis更具争议。高——cidences术后腹部和伤口感染的报告。本研究的目的是比较LA和开放阑尾切除术(OA)复杂的儿童阑尾炎。方法:这是一个前瞻性研究con -导管的儿科手术的时间从2015年1月至2019年1月4年。所有的孩子与复杂的阑尾炎被包括在研究(与当地-适用/穿孔普遍脓肿、附属物的,坏疽的附录)。简单的儿童阑尾炎被排除在研究之外。在80年研究期间孩子dren面对复杂的阑尾炎。40孩子接受开放阑尾切除术和re -主要40接受腹腔镜阑尾切除术。 Data collection included demographics, duration of symp- toms, type of complicated appendicitis, operative time, resumption of diet, early and late complica- tion, length of hospitalization and duration of anti- biotic use. The documented benefits of the laparo- scopic appendectomy (LA) procedure have led to its increasing acceptance for the treatment of appendi- citis, it is nonetheless considered more expensive to perform than a traditional open appendectomy (OA) [1]. There are persistent doubts about the advantag- es and disadvantages in using LA for complicated ap- pendicitis[2]. Although adopted by many centers as a gold stan- dard, benefits of LA over OA are still in debate by many surgeons. This may be attributed to the sim- plicity of OA – which is relatively easy to perform – low morbidity and cosmetic problems are low. Many studies failed to demonstrate the benefits of LA com- pared to OA, but this might be explained by the fact that these studies were performed in the learning period[3],[4]. Recently many studies show that LA provides consid- erable benefits over OA, including a shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain, earlier postoperative recovery, and lower complication rate[5]. The introduction of laparoscopy provides an oppor- tunity to visualize the entire abdominal cavity in cas- es of diagnostic dilemmas[6]. The aim of this study was to compare between LA and OA in complicated acute appendicitis to deter- mine which procedure is better. Data were fed to the computer and analyzed using IBM SPSS software package version 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, USA). Qualitative data were described using number and percentage. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to verify the normality of distribution. Quan- titative data were described using range (minimum and maximum), mean, SD, and median. Significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level. Patients and methods: After the ethical commit- tee’s approval and informed consent, a prospective equivalence randomized study was conducted on 40 patients with suspected complicated acute appendi- citis, and the equivalence study was randomly sub- mitted to OA or LA. The suspicion of acute appendi-
DHRUVA H M博士
阅读全文下载全文
菜单