DISPOSABLE VERSUS REUSABLE INSTRUMENTS IN LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY - A CONTROLLED-STUDY

被引:0
|
作者
PAOLUCCI, V
SCHAEFF, B
GUTT, C
MORAWE, G
ENCKE, A
机构
来源
ZENTRALBLATT FUR CHIRURGIE | 1995年 / 120卷 / 01期
关键词
LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; COST ANALYSIS; LAPAROSCOPIC INSTRUMENTS;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
The instruments for laparoscopic surgery are usually available in a disposable and in a reusable type. We performed a prospective, randomized study, based on the most frequent laparoscopic operation, the cholecystectomy, in order to directly quantify and compare the advantages and disadvantages of both types of instruments. 158 patients, who planned to undergo a cholecystectomy, were randomly distributed into two groups. 80 patients (group A) underwent surgery with reusable instruments and 78 patients (group B) with disposable instruments. We investigated the following parameters and compared them for both groups: length of operation, complications, conversion rate to open surgery, subjective postoperative pain, length of inability to work, technical problems during operation, postoperative hospitalization time, satisfaction of operating room personnel. The analysis of the results demonstrates no difference in the postoperative hospitalization time, in the postoperative complication rate, subjective pain sensation and postoperative inability to work. Differences in favour for the group of patients, operated with disposable instruments, were found in the conversion rate, in the length of operation and, statistically significant, in the amount of intraoperative problems, caused by instrument-technical reasons. Even if considering the greater expenses in time and personnel costs, operations with reusable instruments are in average 1015 DM cheaper.
引用
收藏
页码:47 / 52
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Low-cost total laparoscopic hysterectomy by single-incision laparoscopic surgery using only reusable standard laparoscopic instruments
    Reynders, Anneleen
    Baekelandt, Jan
    GYNECOLOGICAL SURGERY, 2015, 12 (02) : 101 - 105
  • [42] Single incision laparoscopic surgery using conventional laparoscopic instruments versus two-port laparoscopic surgery for adnexal lesions
    Kuan-Ju Huang
    Kuan-Ting Lin
    Chin-Jui Wu
    Ying-Xuan Li
    Wen-Chun Chang
    Bor-Ching Sheu
    Scientific Reports, 11
  • [43] Instruments for gasless laparoscopic surgery
    Gutt, CN
    Held, S
    Voepel, H
    Paolucci, V
    MINIMALLY INVASIVE THERAPY & ALLIED TECHNOLOGIES, 1996, 5 (03) : 307 - 312
  • [44] Instruments for gasless laparoscopic surgery
    Gutt, C
    Voepel, H
    Held, S
    Paolucci, V
    Encke, A
    ZENTRALBLATT FUR CHIRURGIE, 1996, 121 (07): : 578 - 583
  • [45] NEW INSTRUMENTS FOR LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY
    CLARKE, HC
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1972, 39 (04): : 637 - &
  • [46] Eco-efficiency of disposable and reusable surgical instruments-a scissors case
    Ibbotson, Suphunnika
    Dettmer, Tina
    Kara, Sami
    Herrmann, Christoph
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2013, 18 (05): : 1137 - 1148
  • [47] Pre-bent instruments used in single-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparative study of performance in a dry lab
    Miernik, Arkadiusz
    Schoenthaler, Martin
    Lilienthal, Kerstin
    Frankenschmidt, Alexander
    Karcz, Wojciech Konrad
    Kuesters, Simon
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2012, 26 (07): : 1924 - 1930
  • [48] Pre-bent instruments used in single-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparative study of performance in a dry lab
    Arkadiusz Miernik
    Martin Schoenthaler
    Kerstin Lilienthal
    Alexander Frankenschmidt
    Wojciech Konrad Karcz
    Simon Kuesters
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2012, 26 : 1924 - 1930
  • [49] SUBLINGUAL FLUNITRAZEPAM VERSUS ORAL DIAZEPAM FOR PREMEDICATION - A CONTROLLED-STUDY
    BANG, U
    HUTTEL, MS
    ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 1983, 27 : 66 - 66
  • [50] A PROSPECTIVE CONTROLLED-STUDY OF NASOTRACHEAL VERSUS OROTRACHEAL TUBES IN THE NEONATE
    SPITZER, AR
    FOX, WW
    PEDIATRIC RESEARCH, 1981, 15 (04) : 682 - 682