west china medical publishers
Keyword
  • Title
  • Author
  • Keyword
  • Abstract
Advance search
Advance search

Search

find Keyword "开腹手术" 36 results
  • The clinical effect of laparoscopic and open surgery in treatment of gastric cancer and their effect on the blood coagulation state

    Objective To compare the effect of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery on the blood coagulation state in patients with gastric cancer, and to provide evidence for the prevention measurement of thrombosis in perioperative period. Methods One hundred patients with gastric cancer who received treatment in our hospital from Feb. 2014 to Aug. 2014, were randomly divided into laparoscopy group and laparotomy group, 50 patients in each group. The patients in laparotomy group were treated by traditionally open surgery, while patients in the laparoscopy group accepted laparoscopic surgery. The clinically therapeutic effect of 2 groups was compared. Results ① Operative indexes. The operation time, blood loss, anal exhaust time, hospital stay, and morbidity of laparoscopy group were all lower than those of laparotomy group (P<0.05). ② Coagulation function. Compared with preoperative indexes, the prothrombin time (PT) at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group and laparotomy group were both shorter (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and international normalized ratio (INR) between the 2 time points (before operation and 24 h after operation) in both 2 groups (P>0.05). Both at 2 time points (before operation and 24 h after operation), there was no significant difference in PT, APTT, and INR between 2 groups (P>0.05). ③ Fibrinolysis indexes. Compared with preoperative indexes, the fibrinogen (FIB) and D-dimer at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group and laparotomy group were higher (P<0.05). The FIB and D-dimer at 24 h after operation in laparoscopy group were both higher than those of laparotomy group (P<0.05). ④ Follow-up results. There was no significant difference in metastasis rate, recurrence rate, and mortality between the 2 groups (P>0.05), but the incidence of thrombus was higher in laparoscopy group than that of laparotomy group (P<0.05). Conclusions In the treatment of patients with gastric cancer, laparoscopic surgery has the advantages of less trauma, less blood loss, less complications, and so on. Laparoscopic surgery and open surgery both can lead to hypercoagulable state, but the effect of laparoscopic surgery is stronger than open surgery.

    Release date:2017-06-19 11:08 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Clinical Comparison on Laparoscopic-Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery and Open Resection for Gastric Stromal Tumor

    ObjectiveTo compare the results of laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative resection and open surgery for gasric stromal tumor. MethodsFrom January 2010 to March 2015, the clinical data of 56 cases undergoing laparoscopic resection for gasric stromal tumor and 53 cases of traditional operation selected during the same period were retrospectively compared. ResultsThere was no significant difference between two groups in patient's gender, age, body weight, size of tumor, tumor staging, method of operation, intraoperative conditions, postoperative overall complications, local recurrence, and distant metastasis. There were 1 case with the rupture of tumor and 1 case of open surgery transforming in laparoscopic group. In another group, there was the absence of the rupture of tumors. There was no mortality, stomach bleeding, stenosis or leakage occurred between two groups. In laparoscopic group, there were less operative blood loss and abdominal drainage, shorter time of postoperative anal exhaust time, fewer anodyne, a reduction of hospital stay than in convention operation group.However, laparoscopic resection required greater hospital costs and longer operative time. There were significant differences between two groups (P < 0.05). Conciusions With advantages of less blood loss and quicker recovery as compared to conventional operation. Laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative resection for gasric stromal tumor has similar effect when it is performed by well selection of cases, skilled surgeon with experience on open resection for surgical treatment of gastric stromal tumor.

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

    Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect the case-control studies about LH vs. OH for patients with HCC from inception to December, 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 28 studies involving 1 908 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the LH group was superior to OH group on complications (OR=0.35, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.48, P<0.000 01), hospital stay (MD=–4.18, 95%CI (–5.08, –3.29),P<0.000 01), and five years overall survival rate (OR=1.65, 95%CI 1.23 to 2.19,P=0.000 7) and disease-free survival rate (OR=1.51, 95%CI 1.12 to 2.03, P=0.006). However, no significant differences were found in one year and three years overall survival rate, disease-free survival rate, and postoperative recurrence rate. Conclusion Current evidence shows that the LH is superior to OH for the treatment of HCC, and may be amenable to surgery because of its safety and longtime efficacy. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.

    Release date:2017-10-16 11:25 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Effects and Safety of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Open Cholecystectomy for Chronic Atrophic Cholecystitis:A Meta-Analysis of RCTs

    ObjectiveTo systematically evaluation the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC) and open cholecystectomy(OC) for chronic atrophic cholecystitis. MethodsStandard electronic database such as PubMed, Web of science, Cochrane library, CNKI, VIP, CBM, and Wanfang database were searched to retrieve relevant randomized controlled trials(RCTs) that comparing LC with OC, which were analyzed systematically using RevMan5.2. ResultsSeven RCTs including 758 patients were brought into this Meta analysis. There were significant differences between two groups regarding operative time(MD=-27.70, 95% CI:-44.25--11.16, P=0.001), amount of blood loss during operation(MD=-113.25, 95% CI:-141.68--84.81, P < 0.000 01), the recovery time of gastrointestinal function(MD=-28.49, 95% CI:-29.80--27.18, P < 0.000 01), and length of hospital stay(MD=-3.83, 95% CI:-6.01--1.65, P=0.000 6), There were statistically significant difference in utilization rate of anodynes after operation(MD=0.12, 95% CI:0.06-0.23, P < 0.000 1) and terrible postoperative complications(MD=0.24, 95% CI:0.12-0.47, P < 0.000 01) between LC and OC. ConclusionsIn both efficacy and safety, LC for chronic atrophic cholecystitis are significantly superior than the traditional OC. But now the clinical randomized controlled trials about LC is less and the quality is poor, so that its long-term safety evaluation still needs large sample quality RCTs to be further verified.

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Effectiveness and Safety of Laparoscopy Operation versus Laparotomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Meta-analysis

    ObjectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic operation versus laparotomy for stage I-IIa cervical cancer. MethodDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Knowledge, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were searched to collect controlled trials and cohort studies about laparoscopic operation versus laparotomy for stage I-IIa cervical cancer from inception to July 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 3 RCTs, 4 non-randomized controlled trials and 11 cohort studies involving 2 020 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with laparotomy, laparoscopy operation could reduce intraoperative blood loss (MD=-247.99, 95%CI -408.90 to -87.07, P=0.003) , the incidence of perioperative blood transfusion (OR=0.33, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.52, P<0.000 01) , haemoglobin level before and after surgery (MD=-0.98, 95%CI -0.13 to -0.93, P<0.000 01) , postoperative complication (OR=0.61, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.93, P=0.02) , and shorten postoperative exhaust time (MD=-17.41, 95%CI -32.79 to -2.03, P=0.03) and postoperative hospitalization days (MD=-2.51, 95%CI -3.25 to -1.78, P<0.000 01) . There were no significant differences between two groups in the number of pelvic lymph nodes removed, operative complications, as well as the recurrence rate, mortality and non-recurrence survivals after 2 to 5 years of follow-up. But the operation time of the laparoscopy operation group was longer than that of the laparotomy group. ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that compared with laparotomy, laparoscopic operation for early stage cervical cancer has less trauma, less blood loss, shorter hospitalization days and less postoperative complications. Due to the limited quantity of the included studies, more studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Resection for Remnant Gastric Cancer: A Comparison of Surgical Therapeutic Outcome

    ObjectiveTo explore feasibility and advantages of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical resection for remnant gastric cancer. MethodsThe clinical data of 26 patients with remnant gastric cancer who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (hand-assisted group, n=13) or open (open group, n=13) radical resection from December 2007 to May 2016 in this hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The perioperative outcomes were compared between these two groups. ResultsThere was no conversion to open surgery in the hand-assisted group. Compared with the open group, the incision length was significantly reduced (P=0.000), the intraoperative blood loss was significantly decreased (P=0.038), postoperative the first anal exhaust time was significantly shortened (P=0.025) in the hand-assisted group. The operation time, the number of lymph nodes dissection, and the incidence of postoperative complications had no statistically significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionThe preliminary results of limited cases in this study show that hand-assisted laparoscopic radical resection for remnant gastric cancer is safe and feasible, it has several advantages including small incisions, mild intraoperative hemorrhage, rapid postoperative recovery, better recent clinical therapeutic outcome and so on as compared with open surgery.

    Release date:2016-11-22 10:23 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • COMPARISON OF ENDOVASCULAR REPAIR AND OPEN REPAIR FOR RUPTURED ABDOMINAL AORTIC ANEURYSM

    Objective To compare the effectiveness between conventional open repair (OR) and endovascular repair (EVRAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Methods Between March 2000 and July 2011, 48 cases of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm were treated by conventional OR in 40 cases (OR group) or by EVRAR in 8 cases (EVRAR group). There was no significant difference in age, sex, the neck length (less than 2 cm), the neck angulation of aneurysm (more than60°), il iac severe tortuosity, preoperative systol ic pressure, and preoperative comorbidity between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The blood transfusion volume, operation time, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, postoperative complications, reinterventions, and mortality were analyzed. Results There was no significant difference in 24-hour and 30-day mortality rates and non graft-related complications between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). EVRAR group was significantly better than OR group in blood transfusion volume, operation time, and ICU stay (P lt; 0.05), but OR group was significantly better than EVRAR group in reinterventions and graftrelated complications (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion EVRAR has obvious advantages in blood transfusion volume, operation time, and ICU stay, so it is feasible for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients with precise anatomical suitability.

    Release date:2016-08-31 04:23 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • 腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗 Mirizzi 综合征的临床疗效比较

    目的 比较腹腔镜和开腹手术治疗 Mirizzi 综合征的临床疗效。 方法 回顾性收集解放军第 451 医院全军腹腔镜中心于 2010 年 1 月至 2014 年 12 月期间收治的 69 例 Mirizzi 综合征患者的临床资料,根据接受的手术类型分为腹腔镜组(n=36)和开腹组(n=33),比较腹腔镜组和开腹组患者的手术疗效。 结果 腹腔镜组患者的手术时间〔(56.2±19.4)min比(86.2±22.1)min〕、术中出血量〔(47.5±25.4)mL比(104.9±41.6)mL〕、术后进食时间〔(12.4±5.6)h比(29.2±10.4)h〕、术后排气时间〔(11.4±5.7)h比(25.4±6.6)h〕和住院时间〔(5.4±2.4)d比(8.9±3.1)d〕均短于开腹组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后腹腔镜组发生胆瘘 2 例,并发症发生率为 5.56%;开腹组发生胆瘘 1 例,肺部感染 1 例,并发症发生率为 6.06%,2 组患者的近期并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后所有患者均获访,随访时间为 10~35 个月,中位数为 19 个月。随访期间,腹腔镜组和开腹组各有 1 例患者新发胆瘘,远期并发症发生率分别为 2.78% 和 3.03%,2 组患者的远期并发症发生率比较差异也无统计学意义(P>0.05)。所有患者随访期间均无胆管狭窄和结石残留发生。 结论 腹腔镜治疗Ⅰ型和Ⅱ型 Mirizzi 综合征安全有效,可减轻对患者的创伤并加快恢复,对于术前明确诊断的患者可首选腹腔镜治疗。

    Release date:2017-07-12 02:01 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • The clinical value of laparoscopic assisted radical gastrectomy in the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer

    ObjectiveTo assess the outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted surgery for treatment of advanced gastric cancer.MethodsA total of 115 patients with advanced gastric cancer were included between January 2014 and December 2018 were analyzed retroprospectively, the patients were divided into two groups: open surgery group (OS group, n=63) and laparoscopy-assisted surgery group (LAS group, n=52). Baseline characteristics, intraoperative parameters and postoperative items, and long-term efficacy were compared between the two groups.ResultsThere was no significant difference in preoperative baseline data including gender, age and preoperative serum parameters between the two groups (P>0.05). Intraoperative blood loss in the LAS group was significantly less than that in the OS group (P<0.05). In addition, the first feeding time after operation and postoperative hospital stay in the LAS group were significantly shorter than the OS group (P<0.05). Furthermore, numbers of white blood cells and neutrophils in the LAS group were fewer than that in the OS group at postoperative 2 days (P<0.05); the level of serum albumin in the LAS group was higher than that OS group (P<0.05). The number of lymph nodes detected during operation in the LAS group was more than that in the OS group (P<0.05). Operative time and occurrence of postoperative complications were not statistically significant between the two groups (P>0.05). One hundred and ten of 115 patients were followed- up, the follow-up rate was 95.7%. The follow-up time ranged from 6 to 48 months, with a median follow-up time of 12.4 months. The disease-free survival time of the OS group was 12.2±6.5 months, while that of the LAS group was 13.5±7.4 months. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsLaparoscopic technique in treatment of advanced gastric cancer has the minimally invasive advantage, less intraoperative blood loss, less surgical trauma, and faster postoperative recovery in comparing to the traditional open surgery. Also the lymph node dissection is superior to open surgery. The curative effect is comparable to that of open surgery.

    Release date:2019-09-26 10:54 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Application of Ultrasonic Harmonic Scalpel in The Open Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancer

    目的 探讨超声刀(ultrasonic harmonic scalpel,UHS)在消化道恶性肿瘤开腹手术中的应用价值。方法 回顾性分析2009年10月至2011年10月期间广西壮族自治区人民医院普通外科-小儿外科收治并由同一手术者进行消化道恶性肿瘤开腹手术的186例患者的临床资料,根据接受手术的种类(UHS开腹手术或传统电刀开腹手术)将其分为UHS组(86例)和传统电刀组(100例),比较2组患者的手术切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、术后3d引流量、术后住院时间以及住院总费用。结果 UHS组手术切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量以及术后住院时间均短于(少于)传统电刀组(P<0.05);术后3d引流量和住院总费用2组间比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 将UHS应用于消化道恶性肿瘤开腹手术可获得较好的效果,能提高手术操作的效率,具有很好的应用前景。

    Release date:2016-09-08 10:36 Export PDF Favorites Scan
4 pages Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

Format

Content