期刊文献+

3D与2D腹腔镜肾上腺肿瘤切除术对比研究 被引量:3

A clinical comparative study of 2D and 3D laparoscopic technique in adrenalectomy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨与2D腹腔镜相比,3D腹腔镜技术在肾上腺肿瘤切除术中的临床应用价值。方法以2015年11月至2016年3月于徐州中心医院泌尿外科实施腹腔镜下肾上腺肿瘤切除术的患者38例为研究对象,其中18例患者采用2D腹腔镜技术(对照组),其余20例患者采用3D腹腔镜技术(实验组)。分析比较两组在手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症发生率及术后住院时间等方面的差异。结果实验组vs对照组,两组的手术时间[(110±18)min vs(120±20)min]、术中出血量[(60±14)ml vs(64±16)ml]、术后并发症发生率[0vs 0]、术后住院时间[(7.8±2.6)d vs(8.1±2.8)d]比较,差异无统计学意义。结论与2D腹腔镜相比,高清3D腹腔镜对于肾上腺肿瘤切除术等只需要简单外科操作的手术无明显优势。 Objective To investigate if 3D laparoscopic techniques have more clinical value than 2D techniques in adrenalectomy. Methods 38 cases were enrolled in our research from No- vember, 2015 to March, 2016, 18 out of all cases were performed adrenalectomy by 2D laparoscopy, and the other 20 cases were performed by 3D laparoscopy. The operation time, blood loss, complica tions and length of postopertive hospitliztion of both groups were counted for statistical analysis. Results There were no significant difference between two groups in operation time, blood loss, complications and length of postopertive hospitalization. Conclusions Compared with 213 laparoscopic techniques, 3D has no obvious advantages for some uncomplicated operations, such as adrenalectomy.
出处 《现代泌尿生殖肿瘤杂志》 2017年第2期73-75,共3页 Journal of Contemporary Urologic and Reproductive Oncology
关键词 2D腹腔镜 3D腹腔镜 肾上腺肿瘤切除术 Two dimensional laparoscopy Three dimensional laparoscopy Adrenalectomy
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献12

  • 1梁朝朝,周骏,张贤生,郝宗耀,叶元平,刘明,蒋云仙,王克孝.腹腔镜下肾上腺肿瘤切除手术方式的探讨[J].临床泌尿外科杂志,2007,22(8):568-569. 被引量:18
  • 2Davenport K, Burns A, Helo S, et al. Comparison of 3D stereoscope VS standard 2D laparoscope tasks by urology residengts. J Urol, 2012, 187(4): e611.
  • 3Tanagho YS, Andriole GL, Paradis AG, et al. 2D versus 3D visualization: impact on laparoscopic proficiency using the fundamentals of laparoseopie surgery skill set. J Laparoendose Adv Surg Teeh A,2012, 22(9): 865-870.
  • 4Smith CD, Weber C J, Amerson JR. Laparoscopic adrenalectomy: new gold standard. World J Surg, 1999, 23(4): 389-396.
  • 5Perkins N, Starkes JL, Lee TD, et al. Learning to use minimal access surgical instruments and 2-dimensional remote visual feedback: how difficult is the task for novices? Adv Health Sci Educ, 2002, 2(17):117-13l.
  • 6Smith R, Day A, Rockall T, et al. Advanced stereoscopic projection technology significantly improves novice performance of minimally invasive surgical skills. Surg Endosc, 2012, 26(6): 1522-1527.
  • 7Kong SH, Oh BM, Yoon H, et al. Comparison of two- and three- dimensional camera systems in laparoscopic performance: a novel 3D system with one camera. Surg Endosc, 2010, 24 (5): 1132-1143.
  • 8Honeck P, Wendt-Nordahl G, Rassweiler J, et al. Three -dimensional laparoscopie imaging improves surgical performance on standardized ex-vivo laparoscopic tasks. J Endourol, 2012, 26 (8): 1085-1088.
  • 9Hanna GB, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A. Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lancet, 1998, 351 (9098): 248-251.
  • 10Baroeas DA, Salem S, Kordan Y, et al. Robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer:comparison of short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival. J Urol, 2010, 183(3): 990-996.

共引文献23

同被引文献31

引证文献3

二级引证文献3

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部