检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:范天勇[1] 杨璐[1] 梁国标[1,2] 崔晓波[1] 卜司元[1]
机构地区:[1]四川大学华西医院泌尿外科,四川成都610041 [2]遵义医学院附属医院泌尿外科,贵州遵义563003
出 处:《中国内镜杂志》2011年第11期1169-1171,共3页China Journal of Endoscopy
摘 要:目的探讨采用单孔单通道腹腔镜经后腹腔途径微创治疗肾囊肿的临床可行性和有效性。方法回顾性对比分析收治的18例经单孔单通道后腹腔镜肾囊肿去顶减压术和同期18例行常规后腹腔镜肾囊肿去顶减压术患者的临床资料。结果两组36例患者手术均获得成功。单孔组(60.0±12.5)min手术时间较传统三孔后腹腔镜组(25.0±10.5)min更长(P<0.05)。两组在囊肿大小、术中出血、术后引流量等方面差别无显著性(P>0.05)。两组均无术中术后出血、周围脏器损伤及尿漏等并发症发生。单孔组术中无1例中转传统三孔腹腔镜或开放手术;且术后切口疼痛轻微,恢复更快,腰部伤口小、愈合好、疤痕不明显。结论经单孔单通道后腹腔镜微创治疗肾囊肿创伤小、美容效果好,对于选择性的病例有一定的价值。[Objective] To study the feasibility and efficiency of single-port puncture laparoscopy for retroperitoneal unroofing of renal cysts.[Methods] 36 patients with renal cysts were equally assigned to single-port group and traditional laparoscopic group.The clinical results were compared between the two groups.[Results] The operations of all the patients were successful.The operation time of single-port group [(60.0±12.5) vs.(25.0±10.5) min] was longer(P 0.05) than that of traditional laparoscopic group.There were no significant differences in the size of cysts,bleeding amount during operation,discharge volume after operation between the two groups(P 0.05).No complication was observed during the perioperative periods.No operation was converted to traditional tri-port laparoscopy or open procedure in single-port group,leaving the patients mild pain,fast recovery,and negligible scars.[Conclusions] The single-port has the advantage of less trauma and cosmetic effects,which is preferable to specific patients.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.112