BMC surgery · 2024
Comparison of low-pressure and standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities: a double blinded randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tian Feng, Sun Xiaowei, Yu Yang, Zhang Ning, Hong Tao, Liang Lu, Yao Bihui, Song Lei, Pei Changhong, Wang Yu, Lu Wenlong, Qu Qiang, Guo Junchao, Zhang Taiping, He Xiaodong
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The benefits of low-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LPLC) in patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities remain unclear. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and pulmonary effects of LPLC in patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, parallel, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Eligible patients included patients with cardiac or pulmonary comorbidities, who were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo LPLC (10 mmHg) or standard-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) (14 mmHg). The primary outcome was postoperative partial pressure of carbon dioxide (CO2). Surgical safety variables, patient recovery, pulmonary function parameters, and surgeon comfort were also compared between groups.
RESULTS: This study enrolled 144 participants, with 124 participants extracted for the final analysis (62 in LPLC and 62 in SPLC group, respectively). The median postoperative PaCO2 was similar in the LPLC (43.3 mmHg) and SPLC (43.0 mmHg) groups (p = 0.988). Pulmonary parameters including postoperative pH, PaCO2, HCO3, and lactate levels were similar between the two groups. Postoperative base excess was significantly higher in the LPLC group (- 0.6 mmol/L [- 6.9 ~ 7.5] vs. -1.9 mmol/L [- 6.6 ~ 5.4]; p = 0.031). There was no between-group difference regarding intraabdominal operative time, rate of intraoperative bile spillage, blood loss, surgeon comfort during surgery, and conversion rate. Moreover, postoperative major complication rates, the median time to the first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, or mean postoperative visual analog scale score for pain were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found no reduction of partial pressure of CO2 with LPLC compared with SPLC for patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities. LPLC with a pneumoperitoneum pressure of 10 mmHg may be safe and feasible for these patients when performed by experienced surgeons, although it does not improve pulmonary parameters.
REGISTRATION: The trial is retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04670952) on December 17, 2020.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, parallel, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Eligible patients included patients with cardiac or pulmonary comorbidities, who were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo LPLC (10 mmHg) or standard-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) (14 mmHg). The primary outcome was postoperative partial pressure of carbon dioxide (CO2). Surgical safety variables, patient recovery, pulmonary function parameters, and surgeon comfort were also compared between groups.
RESULTS: This study enrolled 144 participants, with 124 participants extracted for the final analysis (62 in LPLC and 62 in SPLC group, respectively). The median postoperative PaCO2 was similar in the LPLC (43.3 mmHg) and SPLC (43.0 mmHg) groups (p = 0.988). Pulmonary parameters including postoperative pH, PaCO2, HCO3, and lactate levels were similar between the two groups. Postoperative base excess was significantly higher in the LPLC group (- 0.6 mmol/L [- 6.9 ~ 7.5] vs. -1.9 mmol/L [- 6.6 ~ 5.4]; p = 0.031). There was no between-group difference regarding intraabdominal operative time, rate of intraoperative bile spillage, blood loss, surgeon comfort during surgery, and conversion rate. Moreover, postoperative major complication rates, the median time to the first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, or mean postoperative visual analog scale score for pain were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found no reduction of partial pressure of CO2 with LPLC compared with SPLC for patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities. LPLC with a pneumoperitoneum pressure of 10 mmHg may be safe and feasible for these patients when performed by experienced surgeons, although it does not improve pulmonary parameters.
REGISTRATION: The trial is retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04670952) on December 17, 2020.