摘要
目的探讨经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)的安全性。方法计算机检索Cochrane图书馆(2011年第1期)、PubMed(1978-2011年)、EMBase(1978-2011年)、CNKI(1978-2011年)有关SILC与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术(CLC)的随机对照试验。按照入选标准,有8项临床试验纳入本研究,由2名作者各自独立地对入选研究中有关试验设计、研究对象的特征、研究结果等内容进行摘录,并用RevMan5.1软件进行分析。结果与CLC相比较,SILC除手术时间延长外[MD=8.03,95%C(I6.02,10.03),P<0.01],术中出血量[MD=-2.41,95%可信区间为(-5.66,0.83),P=0.15]、术后住院时间[SMD=0.15,95%CI(-0.06,0.37),P=0.16]及并发症的发生率[RR=1.21,95%可信区间为(0.53,2.78),P=0.69]差异均无统计学意义。结论对于有条件的医院,经过严格筛选病人,SILC是一种安全有效的手术方式,尤其适用于对美容有强烈要求的病人。
Objective To evaluate the safety of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods Cochrane library （No.1 2011）, PubMed （1978-2011）, EMBase （1978-2011） and CNKI （1978-2011） were searched for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy （SILC） versus conventional laparoscopic holecystectomy （CLC） for the treatment of benign gallbladder disease. According to the inclusion criteria, eight studies were selected. Two authors cited the details about the designs of the trials, identities of the participants and the outcomes from the studies included independently. The data were analyzed by Revman 5.1 software. Results Operating time in the SILS group was longer than that in the CLC group significantly （weighted mean difference =8.03, 95% confidence interval （6.02, 10.03） , P〈0.01）. There was no signi fi cant difference in the introoperative blood loss [weighted mean difference=-2.41, 95% confidence interval （ -5.66, 0.83） , P=0.15], postoperative hospital stay [weighted=0.15, 95% confidence interval （-0.06, 0.37） , P=0.16] and the postoperative complications incidence [relative risk=l.21, 95% confidence interval （0.53, 2.78）, P=0.69] between the two groups. Conclusion SILC is a safe procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated gallstone disease, especially for cosmetic purpose.
出处
《中国实用外科杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2012年第12期1031-1036,共6页
Chinese Journal of Practical Surgery
关键词
经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术
腹腔镜胆囊切除术
META分析
transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy
laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Meta-analysis
