Surgery · 2024
Preoperative diagnosis of adhesion severity between the abdominal wall and intestinal tract with novel abdominal ultrasound methodology to enhance surgical safety.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Nishino Hiroto, Nishimura Takashi, Miyashita Seikan, Tada Masaharu, Fujimoto Yasuhiro, Fujimoto Jiro, Iijima Hiroko, Hatano Etsuro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Adhesions between the abdominal wall and intestinal tract from previous surgeries can complicate reoperations; however, predicting the extent of adhesions preoperatively is difficult. This study aimed to develop a straightforward approach for predicting adhesion severity using a novel abdominal ultrasound technique that quantifies the displacement of motion vectors of two organs to enhance surgical safety. The efficacy of this methodology was assessed experimentally and clinically.
METHODS: Using Aplio500T, a system we developed, we measured the displacement of the upper peritoneum and intestinal tract as a vector difference and computed the motion difference ratio. Twenty-five rats were randomized into surgery and nonsurgery groups. The motion difference ratio was assessed 7 days after laparotomy to classify adhesions. In a clinical trial, 51 patients undergoing hepatobiliary pancreatic surgery were evaluated for the motion difference ratio within 3 days preoperatively. Intraoperatively, adhesion severity was rated and compared with the motion difference ratio. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to appraise the diagnostic value of the motion difference ratio.
RESULTS: In the animal experiment, the adhesion group exhibited a significantly higher motion difference ratio than the no-adhesion group (0.006 ± 0.141 vs 0.435 ± 0.220, P < .001). In the clinical trial, the no-adhesion or no-laparotomy group had a motion difference ratio of 0.128 ± 0.074; mild-adhesion group, 0.143 ± 0.170; moderate-adhesion group, 0.326 ± 0.153; and high-adhesion group, 0.427 ± 0.152. The motion difference ratio receiver operating characteristic curve to diagnose the adhesion level (≥moderate) was 0.938, indicating its high diagnostic value (cut-off 0.204).
CONCLUSION: This methodology may preoperatively predict moderate-to-high adhesions.
METHODS: Using Aplio500T, a system we developed, we measured the displacement of the upper peritoneum and intestinal tract as a vector difference and computed the motion difference ratio. Twenty-five rats were randomized into surgery and nonsurgery groups. The motion difference ratio was assessed 7 days after laparotomy to classify adhesions. In a clinical trial, 51 patients undergoing hepatobiliary pancreatic surgery were evaluated for the motion difference ratio within 3 days preoperatively. Intraoperatively, adhesion severity was rated and compared with the motion difference ratio. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to appraise the diagnostic value of the motion difference ratio.
RESULTS: In the animal experiment, the adhesion group exhibited a significantly higher motion difference ratio than the no-adhesion group (0.006 ± 0.141 vs 0.435 ± 0.220, P < .001). In the clinical trial, the no-adhesion or no-laparotomy group had a motion difference ratio of 0.128 ± 0.074; mild-adhesion group, 0.143 ± 0.170; moderate-adhesion group, 0.326 ± 0.153; and high-adhesion group, 0.427 ± 0.152. The motion difference ratio receiver operating characteristic curve to diagnose the adhesion level (≥moderate) was 0.938, indicating its high diagnostic value (cut-off 0.204).
CONCLUSION: This methodology may preoperatively predict moderate-to-high adhesions.