Cargando…

Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique

OBJECTIVE: With recent advances in minimally invasive techniques, many surgeons are favoring laparoscopic over traditional “open” pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. The results of few studies, however, exist in the literature adequately comparing surgical outcome. We present a retrospe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Caceres, Manuel, Liu, Donald
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2003
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3015479/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12856842
_version_ 1782195523639312384
author Caceres, Manuel
Liu, Donald
author_facet Caceres, Manuel
Liu, Donald
author_sort Caceres, Manuel
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: With recent advances in minimally invasive techniques, many surgeons are favoring laparoscopic over traditional “open” pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. The results of few studies, however, exist in the literature adequately comparing surgical outcome. We present a retrospective analysis of 56 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or open pyloromyotomy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 56 consecutive infants (ages: 2 to 9 weeks; weights: 2.2 to 5.4 kilograms) who underwent laparoscopic (Group A-28) vs open (Group B- 28) pyloromyotomy between January 2000 and May 2001 was performed. Preoperative (age, sex, weight, HCO3, and K values) and postoperative (operating time, time to full feedings, persistence of emesis, and hospital stay) parameters were compared. Statistical analysis was performed via the Student t test and chisquare/Fischer analysis where appropriate. A P value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Preoperative parameters of both groups were similar (P >0.05). In Group A, 26/28 (92.9%) were completed successfully with 2 open conversions. Group A versus Group B average operating times (36.1 vs 32.5 minutes), time to full feedings (24.1 vs 27.0 hours), and hospital stay (2.5 vs 2.6 days) were similar (P >0.05). Persistent vomiting was observed in Group A, 25.0% (day 1)/3.5% (day 2) vs Group B, 39.3% (day 1)/10.7% (day 2). One infant in Group B required operative drainage of a wound abscess 1 week after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy can be performed with similar efficiency and surgical outcome as traditional open pyloromyotomy. Improved cosmesis and avoidance of wound complications are major benefits of this procedure, and a tendency towards less postoperative emesis is a potential benefit that deserves further investigation.
format Text
id pubmed-3015479
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2003
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30154792011-02-17 Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique Caceres, Manuel Liu, Donald JSLS Scientific Papers OBJECTIVE: With recent advances in minimally invasive techniques, many surgeons are favoring laparoscopic over traditional “open” pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. The results of few studies, however, exist in the literature adequately comparing surgical outcome. We present a retrospective analysis of 56 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or open pyloromyotomy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 56 consecutive infants (ages: 2 to 9 weeks; weights: 2.2 to 5.4 kilograms) who underwent laparoscopic (Group A-28) vs open (Group B- 28) pyloromyotomy between January 2000 and May 2001 was performed. Preoperative (age, sex, weight, HCO3, and K values) and postoperative (operating time, time to full feedings, persistence of emesis, and hospital stay) parameters were compared. Statistical analysis was performed via the Student t test and chisquare/Fischer analysis where appropriate. A P value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Preoperative parameters of both groups were similar (P >0.05). In Group A, 26/28 (92.9%) were completed successfully with 2 open conversions. Group A versus Group B average operating times (36.1 vs 32.5 minutes), time to full feedings (24.1 vs 27.0 hours), and hospital stay (2.5 vs 2.6 days) were similar (P >0.05). Persistent vomiting was observed in Group A, 25.0% (day 1)/3.5% (day 2) vs Group B, 39.3% (day 1)/10.7% (day 2). One infant in Group B required operative drainage of a wound abscess 1 week after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy can be performed with similar efficiency and surgical outcome as traditional open pyloromyotomy. Improved cosmesis and avoidance of wound complications are major benefits of this procedure, and a tendency towards less postoperative emesis is a potential benefit that deserves further investigation. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2003 /pmc/articles/PMC3015479/ /pubmed/12856842 Text en © 2003 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
Caceres, Manuel
Liu, Donald
Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique
title Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique
title_full Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique
title_fullStr Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique
title_full_unstemmed Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique
title_short Laparoscopic Pyloromyotomy: Redefining the Advantages of a Novel Technique
title_sort laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: redefining the advantages of a novel technique
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3015479/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12856842
work_keys_str_mv AT caceresmanuel laparoscopicpyloromyotomyredefiningtheadvantagesofanoveltechnique
AT liudonald laparoscopicpyloromyotomyredefiningtheadvantagesofanoveltechnique