Conversion to Open Surgery

转换为开放手术
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:术中转换为开放手术是微创远端胰腺切除术(MIDP)期间的不良事件,与术后不良结局相关。这项研究的目的是开发一种能够预测接受MIDP的患者转化的模型。
    方法:共有352名接受MIPD的患者被纳入本回顾性分析,并随机分配到训练和验证队列。通过文献综述确定了与开放式转换相关的潜在风险因素,并相应地收集了我们队列中这些因素的数据.在训练组中,进行多因素logistic回归分析,调整混杂因素的影响,以确定模型构建的独立危险因素.使用接收器工作特性曲线对构建的模型进行了评估,决策曲线分析(DCA),和校准曲线。
    结果:经过广泛的文献综述,总共确定了十种术前危险因素,包括性,BMI,白蛋白,吸烟者,病变的大小,靠近主要血管的肿瘤,胰腺切除类型,手术方法,MIDP经验,还有恶性肿瘤的嫌疑.多变量分析表明,性别,靠近主要血管的肿瘤,怀疑是恶性肿瘤,胰腺切除术的类型(胰腺次全切除术或左胰腺切除术),和MIDP经验仍然是MIDP期间转换为开放手术的重要预测因素。与现有模型相比,构建的模型提供了更高的判别能力(曲线下面积,培训队列:0.921vs.0.757,P<0.001;验证队列:0.834vs.0.716,P=0.018)。DCA和校准曲线揭示了列线图的临床实用性以及预测值和观察值之间的良好一致性。
    结论:本研究中开发的基于证据的预测模型在预测MIDP转化方面优于以前的模型。该模型可以促进围绕手术方法选择的决策过程,并促进患者对MIDP转化风险的咨询。
    BACKGROUND: Intraoperative conversion to open surgery is an adverse event during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), associated with poor postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop a model capable of predicting conversion in patients undergoing MIDP.
    METHODS: A total of 352 patients who underwent MIPD were included in this retrospective analysis and randomly assigned to training and validation cohorts. Potential risk factors related to open conversion were identified through a literature review, and data on these factors in our cohort was collected accordingly. In the training cohort, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust the impact of confounding factors to identify independent risk factors for model building. The constructed model was evaluated using the receiver operating characteristics curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curves.
    RESULTS: Following an extensive literature review, a total of ten preoperative risk factors were identified, including sex, BMI, albumin, smoker, size of lesion, tumor close to major vessels, type of pancreatic resection, surgical approach, MIDP experience, and suspicion of malignancy. Multivariate analysis revealed that sex, tumor close to major vessels, suspicion of malignancy, type of pancreatic resection (subtotal pancreatectomy or left pancreatectomy), and MIDP experience persisted as significant predictors for conversion to open surgery during MIDP. The constructed model offered superior discrimination ability compared to the existing model (area under the curve, training cohort: 0.921 vs. 0.757, P < 0.001; validation cohort: 0.834 vs. 0.716, P = 0.018). The DCA and the calibration curves revealed the clinical usefulness of the nomogram and a good consistency between the predicted and observed values.
    CONCLUSIONS: The evidence-based prediction model developed in this study outperformed the previous model in predicting conversions of MIDP. This model could contribute to decision-making processes surrounding the selection of surgical approaches and facilitate patient counseling on the conversion risk of MIDP.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究旨在比较机器人辅助直肠切除术与传统腹腔镜和开腹手术的效果,关注并发症发生率,转化率,住院时间,和肿瘤结果。
    方法:一项回顾性单中心队列研究纳入了2013年1月至2023年12月接受直肠切除术的106例非转移性直肠癌患者(UICCI-III期)。患者被分配到开放手术(n=23),传统腹腔镜手术(n=55),或机器人辅助手术(n=28)。
    结果:与微创手术相比,机器人手术的转换率明显较低(p=0.047),与开腹手术(17.91±12天)和腹腔镜手术(17.2±14天)相比,住院时间短(11.5±8天)(p=0.001)。机器人(85.71%)和开放(89.09%)病例的标本质量明显优于腹腔镜(47.83%)(p<0.001)。腹腔镜手术被认为是标本质量较差的危险因素(p<0.001)。在单因素分析中,老年患者(>63岁)的转换风险较高(p=0.049)。两组之间的发病率相当(p=0.131),吻合口漏发生率无显著差异(腹腔镜:18.18%,开放:13.04%,机器人:17.86%)。Kaplan-Meier存活曲线显示各组间总生存概率无显著差异。
    结论:机器人辅助直肠切除术在较低的转换率方面提供了显着的优势,更好的样品质量,更短的住院时间,同时保持与传统腹腔镜和开放方法相当的并发症发生率和肿瘤结局。这些发现支持机器人手术作为直肠癌的标准治疗选择。
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted rectal resection with conventional laparoscopic and open approaches, focusing on complication rates, conversion rates, length of hospital stay, and oncologic outcomes.
    METHODS: A retrospective single-center cohort study included 106 patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer (UICC stages I-III) who underwent rectal resection from January 2013 to December 2023. Patients were assigned to open surgery (n = 23), conventional laparoscopic surgery (n = 55), or robotic-assisted surgery (n = 28).
    RESULTS: Robotic surgery demonstrated significantly lower conversion rates compared to minimal-invasive surgeries (p = 0.047) and shorter hospital stays (11.5 ± 8 days) compared to open (17.91 ± 12 days) and laparoscopic (17.2 ± 14 days) surgeries (p = 0.001). The quality of the specimen was significantly better (Score 1) in robotic (85.71%) and open (89.09%) cases compared to laparoscopic approaches (47.83%) (p < 0.001). Laparoscopic surgery was identified as a risk factor for worse specimen quality (p < 0.001). Older patients (> 63 years) had a higher risk for conversion in univariate analysis (p = 0.049). Morbidity was comparable between the groups (p = 0.131), and the anastomotic leakage rate did not differ significantly (laparoscopic: 18.18%, open: 13.04%, robotic: 17.86%). Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed no significant differences in overall survival probabilities among the groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted rectal resection provides significant advantages in terms of lower conversion rates, better specimen quality, and shorter hospital stays while maintaining comparable complication rates and oncologic outcomes to conventional laparoscopic and open approaches. These findings support robotic surgery as a standard treatment option for rectal cancer.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估无缝线肾部分切除术(SLPN)过渡到标准肾部分切除术(SPN)的速率,关注可能促使此类转换的术前因素。
    方法:在这项回顾性研究中,我们分析了2016年至2023年在我们机构对成人进行SLPN的疗效.受试者为诊断为局部实体肾肿瘤的患者。采用的主要技术是用剪刀切除和氩束凝固止血,仅在必要时使用缝合技术。确定了需要转换为SPN的预测因素,并使用各种统计分析方法探索了多个变量之间的关联,包括逻辑回归,确定关键的术前预测因素。
    结果:我们的机构进行了353SLPN,21例(5.9%)需要转换为SPN。腹腔镜部分肾切除术(LPN)亚组和机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RPN)亚组的转换率分别为7.9%(17/215)和2.9%(4/138)。分别,接近统计学意义(P=.066)。在术前估计的肾小球滤过率(eGFR)方面,转换组和非转换组之间观察到显着差异。手术年龄,肿瘤大小,和外生/内生特性。多变量分析确定手术年龄,术前eGFR,放射学肿瘤大小,和肿瘤外生/内生性质是转化为SPN的重要预测因子。
    结论:这项研究强调了SLPN的有效性和可行性,同时确定了影响转换为SPN的必要性的关键因素。确定的预测因子,包括年轻的手术年龄,术前eGFR优越,和特定的肿瘤特征,为完善手术策略提供有价值的见解。
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate at which sutureless partial nephrectomy (SLPN) transitions to standard partial nephrectomy (SPN), focusing on preoperative factors that might prompt such conversions.
    METHODS: In this retrospective study, we analyzed the efficacy of SLPN performed on adults at our institution from 2016 to 2023. The subjects were patients diagnosed with localized solid renal tumors. The primary technique employed was resection with scissors and argon beam coagulation for hemostasis, with suturing techniques used only when necessary. Predictive factors necessitating conversion to SPN were identified, and the associations among multiple variables were explored using various statistical analysis methods, including logistic regression, to identify key preoperative predictive factors.
    RESULTS: Our institution performed 353 SLPN, with 21 cases (5.9%) necessitating conversion to SPN. The conversion rates for the Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy (LPN) subgroup and the Robotic-assist Partial Nephrectomy (RPN) subgroup were 7.9% (17/215) and 2.9% (4/138), respectively, nearing statistical significance (P = .066). Significant differences were observed between the conversion group and the no conversion group in terms of preoperative estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR), age at surgery, tumor size, and exophytic/endophytic characteristics. Multivariate analysis identified age at surgery, preoperative eGFR, radiological tumor size, and tumor exophytic/endophytic nature as significant predictors for conversion to SPN.
    CONCLUSIONS: This investigation highlights the efficacy and feasibility of SLPN while identifying critical factors influencing the necessity for conversion to SPN. The identified predictors, including younger surgical age, superior preoperative eGFR, and specific tumor characteristics, provide valuable insights for refining surgical strategies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    即使在腹腔镜检查可能存在解剖挑战的情况下,机器人方法也提高了微创结肠切除术的可行性。在评估机器人结肠切除术的相对益处时,需要考虑使用这种新技术完成结肠切除术的失败是否与更糟糕的后果有关。这项研究的目的是评估机器人和腹腔镜结肠切除术后转换为开腹手术的比率,以及两种技术后转换后的结果是否有所不同,因为这尚未得到很好的研究。来自美国外科医生学院(ACS)-国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)(2015-2016),我们确定了接受择期微创结肠切除术的患者.将转换后的机器人与患者人口统计学的腹腔镜手术进行了比较,合并症;主要程序和诊断,延长手术时间和术后并发症。在36,046例结肠切除术中,30,808(85.5%)进行了腹腔镜检查,而5238(14.5%)是机器人辅助的。有3271例(9.1%)转换为开放手术(腹腔镜:2959[9.6%];机器人:312[6%])。术后30天手术部位感染,吻合口漏,肠梗阻,脓毒症,需要输血的出血,尿路感染,再次手术;肺性,肾,心/脑血管并发症;再入院,住院,和死亡率,两组之间相似。然而,机器人转换后深静脉血栓/肺栓塞发生率更高(4.5%vs.2.2%,p=0.01)。与腹腔镜结肠切除术相比,机器人术后的转化率较低。转换后的患者具有相似的结果,除了机器人手术后静脉血栓栓塞较高。机器人技术似乎提高了微创手术的可行性,即使需要转换也不会对安全性和有效性产生负面影响。
    The robotic approach improves the feasibility of minimally invasive colectomy even where there may be an anatomic challenge with laparoscopy. Whether a failure in completing colectomy with this newer technology is associated with worse consequences needs to be considered when evaluating the relative benefit of robotic colectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate rates of conversion to open surgery after robotic and laparoscopic colectomy and whether outcomes after conversion vary after the two techniques since this has not been well studied. From the American College of Surgeons (ACS) - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) (2015-2016), patients who underwent elective minimally invasive colectomy were identified. Converted robotic were compared to laparoscopic procedures for patient demographics, co-morbidities; primary procedure and diagnosis, prolonged operation and postoperative complications. Of 36,046 colectomy procedures, 30,808 (85.5%) were laparoscopic, while 5238 (14.5%) were robotic-assisted. There were 3271 (9.1%) conversions to open surgery (laparoscopic: 2959 [9.6%]; robotic: 312 [6%]). Thirty-day postoperative surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, ileus, sepsis, bleeding requiring transfusion, urinary tract infection, reoperation; pulmonary, renal, cardiac/cerebrovascular complications; readmission, hospital stay, and mortality, were similar between the two groups. However, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism was higher after robotic conversion (4.5% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.01). Conversion was lower after robotic when compared to laparoscopic colectomy. Converted patients had similar outcomes except for vein thromboembolism which was higher after robotic surgery. Robotic technology seems to improve the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery without negatively affecting safety and efficacy even when conversion is required.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:由于胆囊穿孔的高发病率和高死亡率,因此对外科医生来说具有挑战性。稀有,和手术方法。腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)现在与开腹胆囊切除术一起用于治疗胆囊穿孔。本研究旨在根据改良的Niemeier分类评估I型胆囊穿孔患者从腹腔镜到开腹胆囊切除术的影响因素。
    方法:将符合纳入标准的患者分为两组:LC和转换为开腹胆囊切除术(COC)。人口统计,临床,放射学,术中,并对术后因素进行组间比较。
    结果:本研究包括42名符合纳入标准的患者,其中28人在LC组,14人在COC组。他们的平均年龄为68(55-85)岁。两组之间的年龄没有显着差异(p=0.218)。然而,组间性别分布存在显著差异(p=0.025).组间穿孔的位置显著不同(p<0.001)。在LC组中,22例患者从眼底穿孔,四个从后备箱,脖子上还有两个.在COC组中,两名患者从眼底穿孔,四个从后备箱,脖子上有八个。LC(105.0分钟[60-225])和COC(125.0分钟[110-180])组之间的外科手术时间显着不同(p=0.035)。初级外科医生的年龄在LC(42岁[34-63])和COC(55岁[36-59])组之间也存在显着差异(p=0.001)。
    结论:对于改良的NiemeierI型胆囊穿孔,可以安全地进行LC。穿孔部位与Calot三角形的接近度,Charlson合并症指数(CCI),和东京分类是影响腹腔镜胆囊穿孔手术转换为开腹手术的因素。
    BACKGROUND: Gallbladder perforations are challenging to manage for surgeons due to their high morbidity and mortality, rarity, and surgical approach. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is now included with open cholecystectomy in surgical managing gallbladder perforations. This study aimed to evaluate the factors affecting conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy in cases of type I gallbladder perforation according to the Modified Niemeier classification.
    METHODS: Patients who met the inclusion criteria were divided into two groups: LC and conversion to open cholecystectomy (COC). Demographic, clinical, radiologic, intraoperative, and postoperative factors were compared between groups.
    RESULTS: This study included 42 patients who met the inclusion criteria, of which 28 were in the LC group and 14 were in the COC group. Their median age was 68 (55-85) years. Age did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.218). However, the sex distribution did differ significantly between groups (p = 0.025). The location of the perforation differed significantly between groups (p < 0.001). In the LC group, 22 patients were perforated from the fundus, four from the trunk, and two from the neck. In the COC group, two patients were perforated from the fundus, four from the trunk, and eight from the neck. Surgical procedure times differed significantly between the LC (105.0 min [60-225]) and COC (125.0 min [110-180]) groups (p = 0.035). The age of the primary surgeons also differed significantly between the LC (42 years [34-63]) and COC (55 years [36-59]) groups (p = 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: LC can be safely performed for modified Niemeier type I gallbladder perforations. The proximity of the perforation site to Calot\'s triangle, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and Tokyo classification are factors affecting conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery of gallbladder perforations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:本研究的目的是评估在进行困难的腹腔镜胆囊切除术时转换为开腹手术(CO)和腹腔镜次全胆囊切除术(SLC)作为救助程序的患者的发病率和死亡率。
    方法:这项观察性队列研究回顾性分析了2014年至2022年期间困难的腹腔镜胆囊切除术中接受SLC或CO救助手术的患者。使用单变量和多变量逻辑回归模型来确定病态的预后因素。
    结果:共纳入675例患者。675例患者(平均年龄[SD]63.85±16.00岁;男性390例[57.7%])纳入分析,452(67%)接受CO和223(33%)接受SLC。总的来说,两种手术的主要并发症风险均增加(89[19.69%]vs35[15.69%]P.207).然而,一氧化碳胆管损伤的风险增加(18[3.98]vs1[0.44]P.009),出血(平均[SD]165.43±368.57vs43.25±123.42P<.001),肠损伤(20[4.42%]vs0[0.00]P.001),和伤口感染(18[3.98%]vs2[0.89%]P.026),而SLC的胆漏风险较高(15[3.31]vs16[7.17]P.024)。在多变量分析中,Charlson合并症指数(比值比[OR],1.20;CI95%,1.01-1.42),使用抗凝剂(OR,2.56;CI95%,1.21-5.44),III级胆囊炎严重程度的分类(OR,2.96;CI95%,1.48-5.94),和紧急入院(或,6.07;CI95%,1.33-27.74)与出现主要并发症有关。
    结论:SLC与并发症的相关性较小;然而,关于其长期结果的证据很少。需要对SLC进行进一步的研究,以确定从长远来看,作为救助程序是否是最安全的。
    BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate morbidity and mortality in patients taken to conversion to open procedure (CO) and subtotal laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) as bailout procedures when performing difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
    METHODS: This observational cohort study retrospectively analyzed patients taken to SLC or CO as bailout surgery during difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 2014 and 2022. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify prognostic factors for morbimortality.
    RESULTS: A total of 675 patients were included. Of the 675 patients (mean [SD] age 63.85 ± 16.00 years; 390 [57.7%] male) included in the analysis, 452 (67%) underwent CO and 223 (33%) underwent SLC. Overall, neither procedure had an increased risk of major complications (89 [19.69%] vs 35 [15.69%] P.207). However, CO had an increased risk of bile duct injury (18 [3.98] vs 1 [0.44] P.009), bleeding (mean [SD] 165.43 ± 368.57 vs 43.25 ± 123.42 P < .001), intestinal injury (20 [4.42%] vs 0 [0.00] P.001), and wound infection (18 [3.98%] vs 2 [0.89%] P.026), while SLC had a higher risk of bile leak (15 [3.31] vs 16 [7.17] P.024). On the multivariable analysis, Charlson comorbidity index (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; CI95%, 1.01-1.42), use of anticoagulant agents (OR, 2.56; CI95%, 1.21-5.44), classification of severity of cholecystitis grade III (OR, 2.96; CI95%, 1.48-5.94), and emergency admission (OR, 6.07; CI95%, 1.33-27.74) were associated with presenting major complications.
    CONCLUSIONS: SLC was less associated with complications; however, there is scant evidence on its long-term outcomes. Further research is needed on SLC to establish if it is the safest in the long-term as a bailout procedure.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:我们评估了在三级护理中心进行腹腔镜乙状结肠切除术治疗复杂的造瘘憩室病的可行性和安全性。
    方法:对2011年至2021年接受乙状结肠切除术治疗憩室病的患者进行了单中心回顾性研究。主要结果是在30天时转换为开放手术和严重的术后发病率。次要结果包括膀胱造影上的术后膀胱渗漏率。
    结果:在104例患者中,32.7%曾进行过剖腹手术。腹腔镜检查是103例(99.0%)的初始方法,6例(5.8%)转换为剖腹手术。30天Clavien-Dindo≥III级并发症发生率为10.6%,包括两个(1.9%)吻合口漏。术后中位住院时间为4.0天。7名(6.7%)患者接受了再次手术,6人(5.8%)再次入院,1人(0.9%)在30天内死亡。最初创建了十二个(11.5%)回肠造口术,吻合口漏后产生了两个(1.9%)。在最后的随访中,101例(97.1%)患者无气孔。紧急手术术后严重并发症发生率较高。在结肠膀胱瘘患者中(n=73),56.2%的患者进行了术后膀胱造影检查,确定在封闭的抽吸排水沟上检测到的三个膀胱泄漏中的两个。术后结果在有和没有术后膀胱造影的组之间没有差异,包括7天内拔除Foley导管(73.2%vs.90.6%,p=0.08)。
    结论:腹腔镜手术治疗复杂的造瘘性憩室炎的严重并发症发生率低,在高容量结直肠中心转换为开放手术和永久性造口。
    BACKGROUND: We assessed feasibility and safety of laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for complicated fistulizing diverticular disease in a tertiary care colorectal center.
    METHODS: A single-center retrospective study of patients undergoing sigmoidectomy for fistulizing diverticular disease between 2011 and 2021 was realized. Primary outcomes were rates of conversion to open surgery and severe postoperative morbidity at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative bladder leaks on cystogram.
    RESULTS: Among the 104 patients, 32.7% had previous laparotomy. Laparoscopy was the initial approach in 103 (99.0%), with 6 (5.8%) conversions to laparotomy. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complication rate at 30 days was 10.6%, including two (1.9%) anastomotic leaks. The median postoperative length of stay was 4.0 days. Seven (6.7%) patients underwent reoperation, six (5.8%) were readmitted, and one (0.9%) died within 30 days. Twelve (11.5%) ileostomies were created initially, and two (1.9%) were created following anastomotic leaks. At last follow-up, 101 (97.1%) patients were stoma-free. Urgent surgeries had a higher rate of severe postoperative complications. Among colovesical fistula patients (n = 73), postoperative cystograms were performed in 56.2%, identifying two out of the three bladder leaks detected on closed suction drains. No differences in postoperative outcomes occurred between groups with and without postoperative cystograms, including Foley catheter removal within seven days (73.2% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.08).
    CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery for complicated fistulizing diverticulitis showed low rates of severe complications, conversions to open surgery and permanent stomas in high-volume colorectal center.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Multicenter Study
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号