查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy: Prospective Randomized Trial
- Appendectomy during Pregnancy: Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Appendectomy
- 肥胖是否為傳染病
- The Effectiveness of Dietary Instruction in Obese School Children of Southern Taiwan
- 肥胖婦女減重前後體組成及熱量代謝之變化
- 青少年肥胖問題之探討
- Surgical Treatment of Morbid Obesity with Vertical Banded Gastroplasty: A Comparison between TA90-4.8 and TA90-B
- 肥胖兒童的脂質代謝
- 臺中市學童肥胖盛行率之分析:不同篩選指標的比較
- 肥胖婦女減重對其與常見代謝疾病相關之血中指標之影響
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy: Prospective Randomized Trial=腹腔鏡與開腹闌尾切除隨機性的前瞻探討 |
---|---|
作 者 | 尹文耀; 李明哲; 鄭敦仁; 陳華宗; 黃士銘; | 書刊名 | 慈濟醫學 |
卷 期 | 8:3 1996.09[民85.09] |
頁 次 | 頁213-221 |
分類號 | 416.243 |
關鍵詞 | 腹腔鏡闌尾切除; 開腹闌尾切除; 闌尾炎穿孔; 肥胖; Laparoscopic appendectomy; Open appendectomy; Ruptured appendicitis; Obesity; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 腹腔鏡闌尾切除雖然是一可行的方法,但是對於急性闌尾炎的病患到底 有何真正的益處,目前還不是十分的清楚。我們將本院自民國八十三年一月一日 起至九月三十日止,這段期間從急性闌尾炎來比較腹腔鏡闌尾切除及開腹式闌尾 切除,採隨機性的前瞻方法探討:連續七十位病患隨機將三十位分配於腹腔鏡手 術,其餘四十位以傳統開腹手術,我們發現,腹腔鏡闌尾切除需時較長(102.5± 37.18 vs 84.00±35.54分鐘),較少止痛劑 (0.76±1.59 vs 1.32±1.42支),早期進食 (2.13±1.22 vs 3.02±1.42日),傷口感染率較低 (0 vs 20),住院日較少 (5.06±3.02 vs 6.91±4.42日),恢復快 (12±7 vs 19±9日),其中,麻醉需要的時間、傷口感染率 及恢復情況三項,有統計學上明顯意義。在此研究中,急性闌尾炎破裂和肥胖的 病人也有相同的結果,雖然腹腔鏡手術較耗時,但有著上述的優點。所以我們認 為腹腔鏡手術,闌尾切除是一值得考慮的另一選擇。且在急性闌尾炎破裂的一些 病患或肥胖的病人身上應是一有價值的手術。(慈濟醫學1996;8:213-221) |
英文摘要 | Laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible, but whether it confers any advantage to patients with acuteappendicitis is not deary known. A prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopicappendectomy (LAP) with open appendectomy (OAP) in patients with a presumed diagnosis of acuteappendicitis with or without various degrees of complications was conducted between January 1, 1994and September 30, 1994. Seventy consecutive patients were randomized, 30 to LAP and 40 to OAPincluding two laparotomy patients in OAP group for diffuse peritonitis. When compared to OAP, LAPhad longer operative time(102.5±37.18 vs 84±35.54 min), less requirement for analgesia (0.76±1.59 vs1.32±1.42 dose), earlier oral intake (2.13±1.22 vs 3.02±1.42 day), fewer wound infection (0 vs 20),shorter hospital stay (5.06±3.02 vs 6.91±4.42 day) and quicker recovery to normal activity (12±7 vs19±9 day). The similar results were also found in cases with ruptured appendicitis and obesity. Despiteof longer but acceptable operative time for LAP, it provides the advantages as mentioned above.Therefore it should be considered a worthwhile alternative for patients with clinical diagnosis of acuteappendicitis and might also play a considerable role in patients with ruptured appendicitis and obesity.(Tzu Chi Med J 1996; 8: 213-221) |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。