Surgical endoscopy · 2018
Feasibility of a novel laparoscopic technique with unidirectional knotless barbed sutures for the primary closure of duodenal ulcer perforation.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kim Tae-Han, Park Ji-Ho, Jeong Sang-Ho, Lee Jin-Kwon, Kwag Seung-Jin, Kim Ju-Yeon, Lee Woohyung, Woo Jung-Woo, Jang Jae Yool, Song Eun-Jin, Park Taejin, Jeong Chi-Young, Ju Young-Tae, Jung Eun-Jung, Hong Soon-Chan, Choi Sang-Kyung, Ha Woo-Song, Lee Young-Joon
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic primary repair is one of the main procedures used for perforated gastric ulcers, and this technique requires reproducible and secure suturing. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of a novel continuous suture method with barbed sutures during laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data from 116 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers were collected between November 2009 and October 2015. Continuous suturing with 15-cm-long unidirectional absorbable barbed sutures was used for laparoscopic repair in the study group, termed group V (n = 51). Patients who underwent laparoscopic repair with conventional interrupted sutures were defined as group C (n = 65). The complication and operative data were compared between groups.
RESULTS: Although there was no difference between group V and group C in the overall complication rate (15.7% vs. 24.6%; p = 0.259), the complication rate related to suturing was lower (3.9% vs. 15.4%; p = 0.04) in group V. Group V showed rates of 0% for leakage, 2% for intra-abdominal fluid collection, and 2% for stricture; the corresponding rates in group C were 3.1, 7.7, and 4.6%, respectively. Regarding operative data, the total operation time (V vs. C, 87.7 min vs. 131.2 min), total suture time (7.1 min vs. 25.3 min), and suture time per stitch (1.2 min vs. 6.2 min) were significantly shorter in group V than in group C (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The use of a continuous suture technique with unidirectional barbed sutures is as safe as the conventional suture technique and allows easier and faster suturing in the repair of perforated peptic ulcers.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data from 116 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers were collected between November 2009 and October 2015. Continuous suturing with 15-cm-long unidirectional absorbable barbed sutures was used for laparoscopic repair in the study group, termed group V (n = 51). Patients who underwent laparoscopic repair with conventional interrupted sutures were defined as group C (n = 65). The complication and operative data were compared between groups.
RESULTS: Although there was no difference between group V and group C in the overall complication rate (15.7% vs. 24.6%; p = 0.259), the complication rate related to suturing was lower (3.9% vs. 15.4%; p = 0.04) in group V. Group V showed rates of 0% for leakage, 2% for intra-abdominal fluid collection, and 2% for stricture; the corresponding rates in group C were 3.1, 7.7, and 4.6%, respectively. Regarding operative data, the total operation time (V vs. C, 87.7 min vs. 131.2 min), total suture time (7.1 min vs. 25.3 min), and suture time per stitch (1.2 min vs. 6.2 min) were significantly shorter in group V than in group C (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The use of a continuous suture technique with unidirectional barbed sutures is as safe as the conventional suture technique and allows easier and faster suturing in the repair of perforated peptic ulcers.