請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/80375完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 許博欽(Bor-Ching Sheu) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kuan-Ju Huang | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 黃冠儒 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-11-24T03:05:23Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-02-16 | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-11-24T03:05:23Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2022-02-16 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2022-01-19 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 1.Edwards RG: Patrick Steptoe, CBE, MBChB, D.Sc., FRCS (Ed), FRCOG, FRS. Hum Reprod 1996, 11 Suppl 1:214-234. 2.Janssen PF, Brolmann HA, van Kesteren PJ, Bongers MY, Thurkow AL, Heymans MW, Huirne JA: Perioperative outcomes using LigaSure compared with conventional bipolar instruments in laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2011, 118(13):1568-1575. 3.Janssen PF, Brolmann HA, van Kesteren PJ, Bongers MY, Thurkow AL, Heymans MW, Huirne JA: Perioperative outcomes using LigaSure compared to conventional bipolar instruments in laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2012, 26(10):2884-2891. 4.Wong C, Goh A, Merkur H: Comparison of surgical outcomes using Gyrus PKS vs LigaSure in total laparoscopic hysterectomy: A randomised controlled trial. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2020, 60(5):790-796. 5.Tu YA, Chang WC, Wu CJ, Sheu BC: Improved hemostasis with plasma kinetic bipolar sealing device in the vaginal steps of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2019, 58(1):64-67. 6.Chang WC, Chu LH, Huang PS, Huang SC, Sheu BC: Comparison of Laparoscopic Myomectomy in Large Myomas With and Without Leuprolide Acetate. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015, 22(6):992-996. 7.Nezhat C, Zurawin RK: Development and history of morcellators. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2018, 30(1):65-68. 8.Kim YW, Park BJ, Ro DY, Kim TE: Single-port laparoscopic myomectomy using a new single-port transumbilical morcellation system: initial clinical study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010, 17(5):587-592. 9.Lee D, Kim SK, Kim K, Lee JR, Suh CS, Kim SH: Advantages of Single-Port Laparoscopic Myomectomy Compared with Conventional Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018, 25(1):124-132. 10.Kim SM, Baek JM, Park EK, Jeung IC, Choi JH, Kim CJ, Lee YS: A Comparison of Single-, Two- and Three-Port Laparoscopic Myomectomy. JSLS 2015, 19(4). 11.Takeda A, Imoto S, Mori M, Yamada J, Nakamura H: Isobaric two-port laparoscopic-assisted myomectomy by combined approach through umbilical and suprapubic mini-incisions with hidden scar: a technique and initial experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012, 160(1):88-92. 12.Paek J, Nam EJ, Lee M, Yim GW, Kim S, Kim YT, Kim SW: Two-port access versus conventional staging laparoscopy for endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2012, 22(3):515-520. 13.Yi SW: Two-port laparoscopic adnexal surgery with a multichannel port using a wound retractor: is it safe and minimally scarring? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2009, 19(6):781-786. 14.Gaia G, Holloway RW, Santoro L, Ahmad S, Di Silverio E, Spinillo A: Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial cancer compared with traditional laparoscopic and laparotomy approaches: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2010, 116(6):1422-1431. 15.Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BW, Kluivers KB: Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015(8):CD003677. 16.Sheu BC, Huang KJ, Huang SC, Chang WC: Comparison of uterine scarring between robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy and conventional laparoscopic myomectomy. J Obstet Gynaecol 2020, 40(7):974-980. 17.Schreuder HW, Verheijen RH: Robotic surgery. BJOG 2009, 116(2):198-213. 18.Lee HJ, Kim JY, Kim SK, Lee JR, Suh CS, Kim SH: Learning Curve Analysis and Surgical Outcomes of Single-port Laparoscopic Myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015, 22(4):607-611. 19.Chen SY, Sheu BC, Huang SC, Chang WC: Laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy using conventional laparoscopic instruments and glove port technique: Four years experience in 109 cases. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2017, 56(4):467-471. 20.Chambers LM, Carr C, Freeman L, Jernigan AM, Michener CM: Does surgical platform impact recurrence and survival? A study of utilization of multiport, single-port, and robotic-assisted laparoscopy in endometrial cancer surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2019, 221(3):243 e241-243 e211. 21.Fagotti A, Boruta DM, 2nd, Scambia G, Fanfani F, Paglia A, Escobar PF: First 100 early endometrial cancer cases treated with laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: a multicentric retrospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012, 206(4):353 e351-356. 22.Chong GO, Hong DG, Lee YS: Single-port (OctoPort) assisted extracorporeal ovarian cystectomy for the treatment of large ovarian cysts: compare to conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015, 22(1):45-49. 23.Huang BS, Wang PH, Tsai HW, Hsu TF, Yen MS, Chen YJ: Single-port compared with conventional laparoscopic cystectomy for ovarian dermoid cysts. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2014, 53(4):523-529. 24.Schmitt A, Crochet P, Knight S, Tourette C, Loundou A, Agostini A: Single-Port Laparoscopy vs Conventional Laparoscopy in Benign Adnexal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2017, 24(7):1083-1095. 25.Lim TO, Soraya A, Ding LM, Morad Z: Assessing doctors' competence: application of CUSUM technique in monitoring doctors' performance. Int J Qual Health Care 2002, 14(3):251-258. 26.Moulton L, Jernigan AM, Carr C, Freeman L, Escobar PF, Michener CM: Single-port laparoscopy in gynecologic oncology: seven years of experience at a single institution. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017, 217(5):610 e611-610 e618. 27.Casarin J, Multinu F, Ubl DS, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Glaser GE, Butler KA, Ghezzi F, Habermann EB, Mariani A: Adoption of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Decrease in Surgical Morbidity for Endometrial Cancer Treatment in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2018, 131(2):304-311. 28.Chang WC, Lee LC, Huang SC, Sheu BC: Application of laparoscopic surgery in gynecological oncology. J Formos Med Assoc 2010, 109(8):558-566. 29.Park JY, Kim DY, Kim SH, Suh DS, Kim JH, Nam JH: Laparoendoscopic Single-site Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Ovarian Cystectomy for Ovarian Endometrioma. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015, 22(5):813-819. 30.Miernik A, Schoenthaler M, Lilienthal K, Frankenschmidt A, Karcz WK, Kuesters S: Pre-bent instruments used in single-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparative study of performance in a dry lab. Surg Endosc 2012, 26(7):1924-1930. 31.Chen SY, Chang DY, Sheu BC, Torng PL, Huang SC, Hsu WC, Chang WC: Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with in situ morcellation for large uteri. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2008, 15(5):559-565. 32.Kim YW, Min BS, Kim NK, Kim JY, Hur H, Lee KY, Sohn SK, Cho CH: The impact of incorporating of a novice assistant into a laparoscopic team on operative outcomes in laparoscopic sigmoidectomy: a prospective study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2010, 20(1):36-41. 33.Finnesgard EJ, Pandian TK, Kendrick ML, Farley DR: Do not break up the surgical team! Familiarity and expertise affect operative time in complex surgery. Am J Surg 2018, 215(3):447-449. 34.Barnes H, Harrison R, Huffman L, Medlin E, Spencer R, Al-Niaimi A: The Adoption of Single-port Laparoscopy for Full Staging of Endometrial Cancer: Surgical and Oncology Outcomes and Evaluation of the Learning Curve. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2017, 24(6):1029-1036. 35.Seamon LG, Cohn DE, Richardson DL, Valmadre S, Carlson MJ, Phillips GS, Fowler JM: Robotic hysterectomy and pelvic-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2008, 112(6):1207-1213. 36.Lim PC, Kang E, Park DH: Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010, 17(6):739-748. 37.Tahmasbi Rad M, Wallwiener M, Rom J, Sohn C, Eichbaum M: Learning curve for laparoscopic staging of early and locally advanced cervical and endometrial cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013, 288(3):635-642. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/80375 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | "腹腔鏡手術自1970年代發展以來已經有半世紀以上的歷史。在這段期間,克服了光學顯像限制、改善手術器械侷限、加強電燒止血系統效率以及靠著各專家大量的經驗累積分享,讓微創手術朝著減少傷口數量、自然孔洞、降低轉開腹手術及減少出血等極限發展。傳統腹腔鏡技術包含藉由3個以上的傷口完成手術並取出檢體,而隨後發展的單孔腹腔鏡手術則以美觀及高手術技術為主要訴求,透過特殊鏡頭及專用的手術器械完成手術,手術檢體也可以從單一傷口簡單的取出。而雙孔腹腔鏡手術則取兩者所長,另外佔有一席之地。近年來,科技進步讓以遠端操作的機械手臂輔助腹腔鏡手術(達文西系統)蔚為風行,尤其是3D成像、減少操作者手震等優勢,讓術者可以在相對舒適的環境下執行較困難或是時間長的手術,而目前達文西系統通常需要4個以上的傷口才能完成手術。目前,應用在婦產科的腹腔鏡術式有三種,首先是子宮附屬器(即卵巢、輸卵管)相關的手術,此類手術需要基本的腹腔鏡操作技巧以及精細度,手術時間較短,通常大部分的醫師都能完成。其次為子宮切除手術及其延伸的癌症分期手術,此手術牽涉到對解剖構造更深層的認識,並對手眼協調、止血、分離組織的動作有更高的要求,需要一些經驗及學習才能完成手術。而腹腔鏡子宮肌瘤切除手術則除了以上的技巧之外,另外涉及了縫合、打結之類更精細的動作,另外在取出檢體使用的技巧也需要特別的學習。 由於臨床上手術適應症、手術難度、醫師經驗、病患能否支付昂貴的特殊耗材、病人對於預後要求、傷口美觀等考量各不相同,選擇使用哪種手術方式大致上取決於主治醫師主觀裁量,也使得大部分文獻回顧無法以客觀或是有良好證據等級的研究來支持臨床決策。因本院兼具操作不同手術經驗豐富之醫師,本研究透過以不同方式在子宮附屬器及子宮切除手術中,來探討最適合的手術平台以輔助臨床決策。 方法或程序 本研究第一個部分回溯追蹤2011-2018年間在台大醫院接受各種腹腔鏡子宮附屬器手術的病患,並分析其手術相關結果及預後。第二個部分則回溯追蹤2015-2019年間在台大醫院接受腹腔鏡子宮內膜癌症分期手術的病患,並分析其手術相關結果及預後。 結果 在第一部分的研究中,643位病患裡有259位病患接受單孔腹腔鏡手術、384位病患接受雙孔腹腔鏡手術。相較於單孔腹腔鏡手術,雙孔腹腔鏡手術在處理子宮附屬器相關的病灶時可節省手術時間(63.83 ± 25.31 vs. 57.32 ± 26.38分鐘, P < 0.01, OR = 0.98, CI = 0.98–0.99),術式變更率亦較低 (6.25% vs. 24.38%, P < 0.01, OR = 0.20, CI = 0.11 - 0.35),而總出血量高出約2.82毫升 (5.2 vs. 2.38毫升, P < 0.01 , OR = 1.04, CI = 1.02 – 1.07)。 在第二部分的研究中,共有89位病患接受雙孔腹腔鏡子宮內膜癌症分期手術,而有59位接受傳統腹腔鏡子宮內膜癌症分期手術。經多變項迴歸調整後,雙孔腹腔鏡手術可節省手術時間 (152.09 ± 44.26 vs. 187.15 ± 41.87分鐘, P < 0.01, OR = 0.98, CI = 0.97 – 0.99),術後48小時疼痛指數較低 (2.5 ± 0.55 vs. 2.74 ± 0.76, P = 0.03, OR = 0.54, CI = 0.31 – 0.95)。手術併發症、五年復發率及存活率並無明顯差異。而雙孔腹腔鏡學習曲線只需3-4個個案即可掌握此手術。 討論及結論 在現實世界中,病患追求傷口美觀、減低疼痛、減少住院天數等需求漸增,而醫師則需平衡手術難度、手術耗時、醫療成本等來決定適當的處置原則。其中,有些可共同達成,有些則相互衝突。而在微創手術演進過程中,單孔腹腔鏡可為病患需求之代表,達文西手術則較偏醫師取向。惟雙孔腹腔鏡手術因較單孔腹腔鏡不美觀,也被認為操作難易不如傳統腹腔鏡手術,因此一直以來不被重視。本院的腹腔鏡發展涵蓋了傳統腹腔鏡、單孔腹腔鏡、機械手臂輔助腹腔鏡以及自2015年後的雙孔腹腔鏡手術,累積大量臨床經驗。我們證實,雙孔腹腔鏡對子宮附屬器手術可比擬單孔腹腔鏡,而卵巢囊腫切除手術需要較高手術技巧,手術耗時較長。而與傳統腹腔鏡相比,對於困難手術如子宮內膜癌症分期手術,雙孔腹腔鏡手術成效可以達到不劣於傳統腹腔鏡的表現。分析其中原因,因為雙孔腹腔鏡較單孔腹腔鏡手術多了一個操作角度,因此在手術時可以雙手同時靈活運用,並且承襲了單孔腹腔鏡手術單一大傷口的優點(約2公分),利於取出檢體。而對於傳統腹腔鏡來說,雖然雙孔腹腔鏡少使用1至2個器械孔角度輔助手術,但是事實上這些額外的器械孔一般來說是由助手在掌控鏡頭時同時來操作。在這個情況下,助手除了必須滿足與術者手眼協調的腹腔鏡視線外,還要分心來操作另外一個器械,而大多數的情況下,通常是助手無法兼顧,造成視野干擾或是操作干擾,反而影響手術表現。 本研究認為,雙孔腹腔鏡擁有傳統腹腔鏡及單孔腹腔鏡之優點,而減低兩者缺點的影響,使其在大部分的婦產科微創手術能有較好的表現。然而,因涉及資料回溯及本質上無法去除的手術者個人經驗、能力等因素,故本研究仍承襲相關的研究限制及判讀偏誤。或許未來仍需要完整良好設計的多平台腹腔鏡研究來證實我們的發現。" | zh_TW |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2022-11-24T03:05:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-1601202219302700.pdf: 1508008 bytes, checksum: 2685fde508b1a997daa6ad6786e3919b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2022 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 (I) 誌謝 (II) 中文摘要 (III) 英文摘要(VI) 引言 (1) 研究方法及步驟 (4) 統計分析 (4) 結果 (5) 討論 (12) 結論 (13) 參考文獻 (14) | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 傳統腹腔鏡 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 子宮附屬器手術 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 雙孔腹腔鏡 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 子宮內膜癌症分期手術 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 單一切口腹腔鏡 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | adnexa surgery | en |
| dc.subject | conventional laparoscopic surgery | en |
| dc.subject | two-ports laparoscopic surgery | en |
| dc.subject | single-incision laparoscopic surgery | en |
| dc.subject | endometrial cancer surgical staging | en |
| dc.title | 雙孔腹腔鏡手術在子宮附屬器病灶及子宮內膜癌的角色 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Role of Two-port Access Laparoscopic Surgery for Adnexal Lesions and Endometrial Cancer | en |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 110-1 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.author-orcid | 0000-0001-9502-7000 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 張文君(Hong-Yeh Chang),魏凌鴻(Jeng-Han Tsai),黃凱文(Chung-Tse Wu) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 單一切口腹腔鏡,雙孔腹腔鏡,傳統腹腔鏡,子宮附屬器手術,子宮內膜癌症分期手術, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | single-incision laparoscopic surgery,two-ports laparoscopic surgery,conventional laparoscopic surgery,adnexa surgery,endometrial cancer surgical staging, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 16 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202200074 | |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2022-01-19 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 醫學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 臨床醫學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 臨床醫學研究所 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| U0001-1601202219302700.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用(校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務) | 1.47 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。
