General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2021
A prospective comparative study of thoracoscopic transareolar and uniportal approaches for young male patients with primary spontaneous pneumothorax.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Igai Hitoshi, Kamiyoshihara Mitsuhiro, Furusawa Shinya, Ohsawa Fumi, Yazawa Tomohiro, Matsuura Natsumi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: In this study, we introduce a novel approach, thoracoscopic transareolar bullectomy, for treating young male patients with primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). This approach might be less invasive and cosmetically superior to existing methods. We also prospectively compared transareolar and uniportal approaches.
METHODS: Between April 2018 and July 2019, 40 patients were prospectively assigned to transareolar (n = 21) and uniportal (n = 19) groups. We compared patient characteristics and perioperative results. Approximately 1 week or 1 year after the operation, postoperative pain was evaluated using a numerical rating scale (NRS), and cosmetic satisfaction was graded on a four-point scale.
RESULTS: We found no significant between-group differences in patient characteristics or perioperative results. NRS scores did not differ on postoperative day (POD) 7 (transareolar, 1.8 ± 0.9 vs. uniportal, 1.6 ± 0.9; p = 0.62) or in postoperative month (POM) 12 (transareolar, 1.3 ± 0.5 vs. uniportal, 1.1 ± 0.5; p = 0.18). In terms of cosmetic satisfaction, the transareolar group was more satisfied on POD 7 (transareolar, 3.5 ± 0.6 vs. uniportal, 2.9 ± 0.9; p = 0.02) and in POM 12 (transareolar, 3.8 ± 0.5 vs. uniportal, 3.3 ± 0.9; p = 0.0065).
CONCLUSION: Although the perioperative results of the transareolar and uniportal approaches were similar, the former approach afforded a little better cosmetic satisfaction and might be useful option for young males with PSP.
METHODS: Between April 2018 and July 2019, 40 patients were prospectively assigned to transareolar (n = 21) and uniportal (n = 19) groups. We compared patient characteristics and perioperative results. Approximately 1 week or 1 year after the operation, postoperative pain was evaluated using a numerical rating scale (NRS), and cosmetic satisfaction was graded on a four-point scale.
RESULTS: We found no significant between-group differences in patient characteristics or perioperative results. NRS scores did not differ on postoperative day (POD) 7 (transareolar, 1.8 ± 0.9 vs. uniportal, 1.6 ± 0.9; p = 0.62) or in postoperative month (POM) 12 (transareolar, 1.3 ± 0.5 vs. uniportal, 1.1 ± 0.5; p = 0.18). In terms of cosmetic satisfaction, the transareolar group was more satisfied on POD 7 (transareolar, 3.5 ± 0.6 vs. uniportal, 2.9 ± 0.9; p = 0.02) and in POM 12 (transareolar, 3.8 ± 0.5 vs. uniportal, 3.3 ± 0.9; p = 0.0065).
CONCLUSION: Although the perioperative results of the transareolar and uniportal approaches were similar, the former approach afforded a little better cosmetic satisfaction and might be useful option for young males with PSP.