These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Spontaneous pneumothorax. A comparison of thoracoscopy and thoracotomy].
    Author: Bernard A, Bélichard C, Goudet P, Lombard JN, Viard H.
    Journal: Rev Mal Respir; 1993; 10(5):433-6. PubMed ID: 8256029.
    Abstract:
    The aims of this study were to assess the advantages of surgical thoracoscopy versus thoracotomy. Two 16-patient groups (thoracotomy, thoracoscopy) were compared. They were equivalent with regards to technique, age, etiology and lung dystrophy. Patients were called by phone to evaluate the surgical and functional results. The questionnaire was filled out by an independent physician who ignored the surgical technique used. Hospital stay was 7 +/- 2 days for thoracoscopy versus 11.5 +/- 5 days for thoracotomy (p < 0.003). During the J30 to J60 period of time, pain was mild in 94% of thoracoscopy cases and severe or unbearable in 69% of thoracotomy cases (p < 0.002). Mobility of the shoulder was fully recovered in all thoracoscopy patients within the first month versus only 62% of recovery at 3 months in the thoracotomy group (p < 0.0001). Working was possible at 1 +/- 0.8 month in the thoracoscopy group versus 2.6 +/- 0.8 months in the thoracotomy group (p < 0.002). Leisure activities were resumed at 2 +/- 1 month in the thoracoscopy group versus 4 +/- 1 months in the thoracotomy group (p < 0.0005). Only one relapse occurred in the thoracoscopy group. Thoracoscopy prevents the drawbacks of thoracotomy but keeps the same efficiency in the treatment of pneumothorax.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]