腹腔镜与开腹消化性溃疡穿孔修补术比较的Meta分析  

Meta-analysis of laparoseopic and open repair of perforated peptic ulcer

作　　者：丁杰[1] 廖国庆[2] 张忠民[1] 潘扬[1] 李东苗[1] 王润华[1] 徐开盛[1] 杨晓飞[1] 袁平[1] 王少勇[1] 

机构地区：[1]贵州省人民医院胃肠外科,贵阳550002 [2]中南大学湘雅医院胃肠外科

出　　处：《中华胃肠外科杂志》2011年第10期785-789,共5页Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

摘　　要：目的评价腹腔镜修补手术治疗消化性溃疡穿孔的安全性和有效性。方法收集1990－2011年公开发表的腹腔镜和开腹消化性溃疡穿孔修补术的中文和英文文献．对腹腔镜组和开腹组的术中情况、术后恢复情况及术后并发症情况进行Meta分析。结果筛选出符合纳入标准的研究19项，共1507例，腹腔镜组673例，开腹组834例。与开腹组相比，腹腔镜组患者术中出血量更少，术后排气时间更快、住院时间更短、术后切口感染率和围手术期死亡率更低（均P〈O．05）。两组患者手术时间和术后败血症、肺部感染、腹腔脓肿、修补处瘘发生率的差异则无统计学意义（均P〉O．05）。结论腹腔镜修补手术治疗消化性溃疡穿孔具有出血少、恢复快、切口感染和死亡率低的优势．安全可行。Objective To assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic and open repair of perforated peptic ulcer. Methods Studies on comparison between laparoscopie repair （LR） and open repair （OR） of perforated peptic ulcer were collected. Data of operating time, blood loss, time to first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications and mortality between LR group and OR group were meta-analyzed using fixed effect model and random effect model. Results Nineteen studies including 1507 patients were selected for this study,including laparoscopic surgery （n=673） and open surgery （n=834）. There were significant differences in blood loss, time to first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, wound infection rate and mortality between LR group and OR group. However, no significant differences existed in operative time, postoperative sepsis, pulmonary infection, abdominal abscess, and suture leakage between the two groups. Conclusions Laparoscopie repair of perforated peptic ulcer is associated with improved outcomes in terms of less blood loss, quicker recovery, and lower rates of wound infection and mortality. Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is safe and feasible.

关 键 词：消化性溃疡穿孔 腹腔镜 穿孔修补术 META分析 

分 类 号：R656.62[医药卫生—外科学]