摘要
目的评估经脐入路腹腔镜手术中常用3种Port的灵活性。方法用腹腔镜操作训练箱、薄膜应变片和动静态应变测试采集系统组建应变测力传感装置,比较使用不同Port完成相同操作的用力和时间。结果完成相同标准操作用力Multi-ports组最小,且用力显著小于TriPort组[右手(0.68±0.12)N vs.(1.33±0.22)N,P=0.000;左手(0.66±0.18)N vs.(1.25±0.21)N,P=0.000],SILS Port组用力显著小于TriPort组[右手(0.92±0.29)N vs.(1.33±0.22)N,P=0.003;左手(0.82±0.18)N vs.(1.25±0.21)N,P=0.001]。Multi-ports组完成操作时间最短,显著少于SILS Port组[(76.6±17.8)s vs.(105.9±27.2)s,P=0.030)和TriPort组[(76.6±17.8)s vs.(106.3±23.9)s,P=0.028]。结论 3种置入装置中,完成相同标准操作Multi-ports用力较小、所需时间最少,操作相对更为灵活。
Objective To evaluate the flexibility of three common access devices in transumbilical laparoscopie surgery. Methods A strain force measurement system, which was composed of a training simulator, strain gauges and force sensing systems mounted with a dedicated software,was set up. Based on this system, the forces and operaton time were compared among Multi-ports, TriPort and SILS Port, when a standard task was performed. Results Compared to TriPort group, Multi-ports group had significantly lower mean operation force right hand： （0.68 ±0.12） N vs. （ 1.33 ±0.22） N, P =0. 000; left hand： （0.66±0.18） N vs. （ 1.25 ± 0.21 ） N, P = 0. 000 ]. The SILS Port group showed significantly lower mean operation force than TriPort group right hand： （0.92±0.29） N vs. （1.33±0.22） N, P=0.003; left hand： （0.82±0.18） N vs. （1.25 ±0.21） N, P=0.001]. And Multi-ports group had significantly shorter operation time than both SILS Port （76.6± 17.8） sec vs. （ 105.9 ±27.2） sec, P = 0.030） and TriPort groups （76.6 ±17.8） sec vs. （106.3 ±23.9） sec, P=0.028]. Conclusion Considering its least force and shortest operation time, we recommend Multi-ports as the most flexible device in a training simulator.
出处
《中国微创外科杂志》
CSCD
2013年第2期184-186,共3页
Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery
基金
上海浦东新区重点发展学科项目资助(PWZxk2010-07)
