단일공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술 110예의 고찰 및다공법과의 비교
Evaluation of 110 cases of single-port access laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (SPA-LAVH) and comparison with multi-port access
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
목적: 통상적인 복강경기구만을 사용한 단일공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술을 다공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술과 비교하여 안전성 및 유용성을 평가하고자 하였다. 연구 방법: 2007년 4월부터 2009년 11월까지 인천성모병원에서 자궁근종 또는 자궁샘근증의 질환으로 단일공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술을 시행받은 환자 110명과 다공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술을 시행받은 환자 110명, 총 220명의 환자를 대상으로 하였다. 우리는 모든 수술에서 통상적으로 사용되는 구부러지지 않는 일직선의 복강경기구를 사용하였다. 또한 단일공법 및 다공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술 둘 다에서 수술자 (Kim, YW)의 이름을 따서 명명한 새로운 질단부 봉합 방법인 “김씨 질구개 현수법 (Kim’s Vaginal Vault Suspension Method)”을 사용하였다. 결과: 환자 나이, 수술 시간, 자궁의 무게 , 혈색소 수치의 변화, 수혈 빈도, 수술 후 발열에서 두 군 간에 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 환자들의 평균 나이는 46.7±7.0세 (단일공법)와 45.5±6.3세 (다공법)이었다. 평균 수술 시간은 87.2±21.0분 (단일공법)과 83.3±20.3분 (다공법), 평균 자궁의 무게는 261.4±139.7 g (단일공법)과 257.8±132.9 g (다공법), 평균 혈색소 수치의 변화는 1.1±0.7 g/dL (단일공법)와 1.2±0.6 g/dL (다공법)이었다. 두 군 모두에서 수술 중 장 또는 요로의 손상은 없었다. 두 군 모두에서 각각 한 건의 개복수술로의 전환이 있었다. 단일공법을 시행한 군에서 입원 기간이 유의하게 짧았다 (2.6±0.6일 [단일공법], 3.3±0.7일 [다공법], P<0.05). 결론: 통상적으로 사용하는 구부러지지 않는 일직선의 복강경기구를 이용한 단일공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술은 다공법 복강경하 질식자궁절제술에 대한 안전하고 유용한 대체 수술이 될 수 있다.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of single-port access laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (SPA-LAVH) using conventional laparoscopic instruments compared to multi-port access laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (MPA-LAVH). Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 220 patients with uterine leiomyoma or adenomyosis who underwent 110 SPA-LAVH and 110 MPA-LAVH in Incheon St. Mary's Hospital between April 2007 and November 2009. We performed SPA-LAVH with conventional rigid straight laparoscopic instruments in all cases. We also performed a new vaginal cuff closure method, Kim’s Vaginal Vault Suspension Method, named after the operator (Kim, YW) in both SPA-LAVH and MPA-LAVH. Results: There was no significant difference in patients' age, operating time, uterine weight, hemoglobin change, frequency of blood transfusion, and incidence of postoperative fever between the two groups. The patients' mean age was 46.1±7.0 years (SPA-LAVH) and 45.5±6.3 years (MPA-LAVH). The mean operating time was 87.2±21.0 minutes (SPA-LAVH) and 83.3±20.3 minutes (MPA-LAVH). The mean uterine weight was 261.4±139.7 g (SPA-LAVH) and 257.8±132.9 g (MPA-LAVH). The mean hemoglobin change was 1.1±0.7 g/dL (SPA-LAVH) and 1.2±0.6 g/dL (MPA-LAVH). Neither bowel injury nor urinary tract injury occurred during the operation in the two groups. One of the SPA-LAVH and one of the MPA-LAVH cases were converted to abdominal total hysterectomy. The mean hospital stay time was shorter with SPA-LAVH (2.6±0.6 days [SPA-LAVH] and 3.3±0.7 days [MPA-LAVH], P<0.05). Conclusion: SPA-LAVH using conventional rigid straight laparoscopic instruments can be offered as a safe and feasible alternative to MPA-LAVH.
참고문헌 (19)
- Wattiez A, "The learning curve of total laparoscopic hysterectomy: comparative analysis of 1647 cases", J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc, 9, pp.339~345 (2002)
- Kim YW, "Single port (one port) total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH): initial experience in Korea", Proceedings of the 94th Annual Congress of Korean Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, pp.211~ (2008)
- Kim YW, "Single port (one port) total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH): initial experience in Korea", Proceedings of the 9th Annual Congress of the Asia-Pacific Association for Gynecologic Endoscopy and Minimally Invasive Therapy, pp.86~ (2008), APAGE
- 김용욱, "배꼽만을 통한 단일공법 복강경하 전자궁절제술: 한국최초 임상보고", Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 52(4), pp.480~486 (2009), 대한산부인과학회
- Raman JD, "Singleincision laparoscopic surgery: initial urological experience and comparison with natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery", BJU Int, 101, pp.1493~1496 (2008)
- Palanivelu C, "Transvaginal endoscopic appendectomy in humans: a unique approach to NOTES-world's first report", Surg Endosc, 22, pp.1343~1347 (2008)
- Zornig C, "Scarless cholecystectomy with combined transvaginal and transumbilical approach in a series of 20 patients", Surg Endosc, 22, pp.1427~1429 (2008)
- Zorron R, "NOTES transvaginal cholecystectomy: preliminary clinical application", Surg Endosc, 22, pp.542~547 (2008)
- Koh CH, "A new technique and system for simplifying total laparoscopic hysterectomy", J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc, 5, pp.187~192 (1998)
- Garry R, "Laparoscopic hysterectomy: Definition and indications", Gynaecol Endosc, 3, pp.1~3 (1994)
- Munro MG, "A classification system for laparoscopic hysterectomy", Obstet Gynecol, 82, pp.624~629 (1993)
- Capelouto CC, "Complications of laparoscopic surgery", Urology, 42, pp.2~12 (1993)
- Bhoyrul S, "Trocar injuries in laparoscopic surgery", J Am Coll Surg, 192, pp.677~683 (2001)
- Wang PH, "Incarcerated hernia in a 5-mm cannula wound", J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc, 8, pp.449~452 (2001)
- Leggett PL, "Minimizing ports to improve laparoscopic cholecystectomy", Surg Endosc, 14, pp.32~36 (2000)
- Yim GW, "Transumbilical single-port access versus conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy: surgical outcomes", Am J Obstet Gynecol (2010)
- Kim TJ, "Single-port-access laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopicassisted vaginal hysterectomy: a comparison of perioperative outcomes", Surg Endosc (2010)
- Lee YY, "Single-port access laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy: a novel method with a wound retractor and a glove", J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 16, pp.450~453 (2009)
- Sotelo R, "Laparo-endoscopic single site (LESS)", Actas Urol Esp, 33, pp.172~181 (2009)