切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (02) : 199 -202. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.02.020

所属专题: 文献

临床论著

二氧化碳气腹在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补手术中对心电图影响的前瞻性随机对照研究
宋彬彬1, 朱熠林2, 杨继超1, 陈杰2,()   
  1. 1. 100043 首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院心电图室
    2. 100043 首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院疝和腹壁外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-10-02 出版日期:2021-04-18
  • 通信作者: 陈杰

Effect of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on electrocardiogram during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair:A prospective randomized controlled study

Binbin Song1, Yilin Zhu2, Jichao Yang1, Jie Chen2,()   

  1. 1. Department of Electrocardiogram, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100043, China
    2. Department of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100043, China
  • Received:2020-10-02 Published:2021-04-18
  • Corresponding author: Jie Chen
引用本文:

宋彬彬, 朱熠林, 杨继超, 陈杰. 二氧化碳气腹在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补手术中对心电图影响的前瞻性随机对照研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(02): 199-202.

Binbin Song, Yilin Zhu, Jichao Yang, Jie Chen. Effect of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on electrocardiogram during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair:A prospective randomized controlled study[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(02): 199-202.

目的

对比CO2气腹在腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术(TAPP)手术和腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术(TEP)手术中对心电图的影响结果。

方法

收集2019年6至11月,首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院疝和腹壁外科120例原发性腹股沟疝患者的临床资料。按照随机数表法分为TAPP组和TEP组,通过对比患者手术前后心电图情况及术中血流动力学改变,分析两种手术方式气腹对心电图的影响。

结果

TAPP组手术时间(45.2±12.33)min和TEP组(41.32±8.09)min比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);TAPP组平均麻醉时间(58.4±12.11)min和TEP组(59.27±8.69)min比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。TAPP急性疼痛情况2例(3.33%),TEP组4例(6.67%),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);2组患者术中均未出现并发症,如严重出血、输精管损伤、精索血管损伤、肠管或膀胱损伤等;在院期间2组患者未出现尿潴留、谵妄及静脉血栓等围手术期并发症。2组心电图异常发生率、术后心率和术后平均动脉压(MAP)比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2组术前心率和术前MAP比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

TEP手术在术中心电图影响方面较TAPP存在劣势,TEP手术可能会引起更多的心电图异常改变,需要严密监测。

Objective

To compare the effect of carbon dioxide (CO2) pneumoperitoneum on electrocardiogram (ECG) during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal hernia repair (TEP).

Methods

Clinical data of 120 patients with primary inguinal hernia in Beijing Chaoyanghospitalbetween June to November 2019 were collected. All patients were randomly divided into the TAPP group and the TEP group. By comparing the electrocardiogram situation of patients before and after operation and intraoperative hemodynamic changes, the influence of pneumoperitoneum on electrocardiogram of the two surgical methods was analyzed.

Results

The operation time of patients in TEP group was (41.32±8.09) minutes, shorter than that in TAPP group [(45.2±12.33) minutes], and the difference was significant (P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of anesthesia duration [(58.4±12.11) minutes vs (59.27±8.69) minutes, P>0.05]. Acute pain occurred in 2 cases (3.33%) in TAPP group, and 4 cases (6.67%) in TEP group, without statistical significance (P>0.05). There were no intraoperative complications in both groups, such as severe bleeding, vas deferens injury, spermatic vessels injury, andintestinal or bladder injury. There were no perioperative complications in both groups, such as urinary retention, delirium and venous thrombosis.In terms of the abnormalities in electrocardiogram, postoperative heart rate (HR) and postoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP), the differences between the two groups were significant (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in preoperative HR and preoperative MAP between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with TAPP, TEP surgery has a disadvantage in terms of intraoperative ECG influence. TEP surgery may cause more abnormal changes in ECG, which requires closely monitoring.

表1 2组患者心电图情况比较
表2 2组患者心率及MAP情况比较
[1]
Pahwa HS, Kumar A, Agarwal P, et al. Current trends in laparoscopic groin hernia repair: A review[J]. World J Clin Cases, 2015, 3(9): 789-792.
[2]
Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, et al. European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients[J]. Hernia, 2009, 13(4): 343-403.
[3]
HerniaSurge Group. International guidelines for groin hernia management[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(1): 1-165.
[4]
Liu Y, Wang M, ZhuY, et al. Effect of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on acid-base balance during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a prospective randomized controlled study. Hernia, 2020 Sep 4, Online ahead of print.
[5]
中国日间手术合作联盟,中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版)编委会,中国医师协会外科医师分会疝和腹壁外科医师委员会, 等. 腹股沟疝日间手术规范化流程专家共识(2019版)[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(3): 193-197.
[6]
唐健雄,李绍杰. 我国疝与腹壁外科发展和在新世纪创新挑战[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2020, 40(1): 89-92.
[7]
Gaszyński T. The effect of pneumoperitoneum on haedynamic parameters in morbidly obese patients[J]. AnestezjolIntensTer, 2011, 43(3): 148-152.
[8]
Bittner R, Montgomery MA, Arregui E, et al. Update of guidelines on laparoscopic(TAPP) and endoscopic(TEP) treat of inguinal hernia(International Endohernia Society)[J]. SurgEndosc, 2015, 29(2): 289-321.
[9]
Yilmaz S, Koken T, Tokyol C, et al. Can preconditioning reduce laparoscopy-inducedtissueinjury[J]. SurgEndosc, 2003, 17(5): 819-824.
[10]
兰玲. 二氧化碳气腹对高龄胆囊切除患者呼吸循环功能的影响[J]. 医学理论与实践, 2010, 23(6): 677-678.
[11]
Kckerling F, Simons MP. Current concepts of inguinal hernia repair[J]. Visc Med, 2018, 34(2): 145-150.
[12]
Bittner R, Schwarz J. Primary unilateral not complicated inguinal hernia: our choice of TAPP, why, results and review of literature[J]. Hernia, 2019, 23(3): 417-428.
[13]
Liu J, Zhu Y, Shen Y, et, al. The feasibility laparoscopic management of incarcerated obturator hernia[J]. SurgEndosc, 2017, 31(2): 656-660.
[14]
Zhu Y, Liu M, Li J, et al. Closure of direct inguinal hernia defect in laparoscopic hernioplasty to prevent seroma formation: a prosctive double-blind randomized controlled trial[J]. SurgLaparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2019, 29(1): 18-21.
[1] 燕速, 霍博文. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治性切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 13-13.
[2] 母德安, 李凯, 张志远, 张伟. 超微创器械辅助单孔腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 14-14.
[3] 李国新, 陈新华. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术食管空肠吻合的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-4.
[4] 李子禹, 卢信星, 李双喜, 陕飞. 食管胃结合部腺癌腹腔镜手术重建方式的选择[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 5-8.
[5] 李乐平, 张荣华, 商亮. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治淋巴结清扫策略[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 9-12.
[6] 陈方鹏, 杨大伟, 金从稳. 腹腔镜近端胃癌切除术联合改良食管胃吻合术重建His角对术后反流性食管炎的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 15-18.
[7] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[8] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[9] 任佳, 马胜辉, 王馨, 石秀霞, 蔡淑云. 腹腔镜全胃切除、间置空肠代胃术的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 31-34.
[10] 王庆亮, 党兮, 师凯, 刘波. 腹腔镜联合胆道子镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 313-313.
[11] 杨建辉, 段文斌, 马忠志, 卿宇豪. 腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 314-314.
[12] 叶劲松, 刘驳强, 柳胜君, 吴浩然. 腹腔镜肝Ⅶ+Ⅷ段背侧段切除[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 315-315.
[13] 郭兵, 王万里, 何凯, 黄汉生. 腹腔镜下肝门部胆管癌根治术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 143-143.
[14] 李凯, 陈淋, 苏怀东, 向涵, 张伟. 超微创器械在改良单孔腹腔镜巨大肝囊肿开窗引流及胆囊切除中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 144-144.
[15] 魏丽霞, 张安澜, 周宝勇, 李明. 腹腔镜下Ⅲb型肝门部胆管癌根治术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 145-145.
阅读次数
全文


摘要