
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy with open pyloromyotomy in treatment of congenital hypertrophic pyloric stenosis(CHPS). METHODS: Fifteen patients (age 20%ape;90 days, body weight 2.5 approximate, equals 5.0 kg) with CHPS underwent laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (Group I) and 10 patients (age 26 approximate, equals 90 days, body weight 2.8 approximate, equals 4.5 kg) with CHPS underwent open pyloromyotomy (Group II). Ambulatory 24 hr esophageal pH metry and gastroesophageal mamometry were studied in two groups before and after surgery. RESULTS: All patients presented gastroesophageal reflux (GER) before operation and all reflux parameters were significantly decreased after operation (P<0.01). There was no significant difference between two groups in reflux parameters after surgery. Intragastric pressure (GP) significantly reduced in two groups after operation(3.83+/-1.45)mmHg compared with (2.38+/-0.54)mmHg P<0.01 in Group I,(4.52+/-1.96)mmHg compared with (2.38+/-0.72)mmHg P<0.05 in Guoup II). There was no significant difference in lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP), lower esophageal sphincter length (LESL) before and after operation in two groups. The mean operative time for Group I was (32+/-19) mins, which was close to that of Group II after an initial trail. Oral feeding was started 6 h postoperatively in Group I, which was earlier than that in Group II. No technical failures and complications in Group I were encountered. One wound infection and dehiscense was seen in Group II. CLUSION: Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis is safe and feasible, which has lesser complication and similar effect of antireflux as open pyloromyotomy.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
