Suppr超能文献

200例肾肿瘤患者腹腔镜与开放性部分肾切除术的对比分析

Comparative analysis of laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for renal tumors in 200 patients.

作者信息

Gill Inderbir S, Matin Surena F, Desai Mihir M, Kaouk Jihad H, Steinberg Andrew, Mascha Ed, Thornton Julie, Sherief Mahmoud H, Strzempkowski Brenda, Novick Andrew C

机构信息

Glickman Urological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue A-100, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.

出版信息

J Urol. 2003 Jul;170(1):64-8. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000072272.02322.ff.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is an emerging minimally invasive, nephron sparing approach for renal cell carcinoma. We compared perioperative outcomes after laparoscopic and open nephron sparing surgery (NSS) for patients with a solitary renal tumor of 7 cm or less at a single institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since September 1999, 100 consecutive patients have undergone laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for a sporadic single renal tumor of 7 cm or less at our institution. A contemporary cohort of 100 consecutive patients with similar inclusion criteria have undergone open NSS since April 1998. Since our laparoscopic technique was based on our established open surgical principles, the 2 approaches were similar, including transient renal vascular control, sharp tumor excision in a bloodless field, pelvicaliceal repair when necessary, suture ligation of transected intrarenal blood vessels and suture repair of the renal parenchymal defect over a bolster. Demographic, intraoperative, postoperative and short-term followup data were retrospectively compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Median tumor size was 2.8 cm in the laparoscopic group and 3.3 cm in the open group (p = 0.005). There were significantly more tumors greater than 4 cm in the open group (p <0.001). There were more patients with a solitary kidney in the open surgical group (p = 0.002). More patients in the open group underwent NSS for a malignant tumor (p = 002). Comparing the laparoscopic versus open groups, median surgical time was 3 vs 3.9 hours (p <0.001), blood loss was 125 vs 250 ml (p <0.001) and mean warm ischemia time was 27.8 vs 17.5 minutes (p <0.001), respectively. In the laparoscopic and open groups median analgesic requirement was 20.2 vs 252.5 mg morphine sulfate equivalents (p <0.001), hospital stay was 2 vs 5 days (p <0.001) and average convalescence was 4 vs 6 weeks (p <0.001). Median preoperative serum creatinine (1.0 vs 1.0 mg/dl, p = 0.52) and postoperative serum creatinine (1.1 vs 1.2 mg/dl, p = 0.65) were similar in the 2 groups. No kidney was lost due to warm ischemic injury. Three patients in the laparoscopic group had a positive surgical margin compared to none in the open groups (3% vs 0%, p = 0.1). Laparoscopic NSS was associated with a higher rate of major intraoperative complications (5% vs 0%, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in overall postoperative complications, although renal/urological complications were more common in the laparoscopic group (11% vs 2%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical partial nephrectomy remains the established standard for nephron sparing treatment of renal tumors. When applied to small renal tumors, the laparoscopic approach is associated with longer warm renal ischemia time, more major intraoperative complications and more postoperative urological complications. Our data also suggest that more deliberate efforts to achieve a wider surgical margin are necessary with the laparoscopic approach. Nevertheless, our data suggest that laparoscopic NSS is emerging as an effective, minimally invasive therapeutic approach with respect to renal functional outcome with the additional advantages of decreased postoperative narcotic use, earlier hospital discharge and a more rapid convalescence. Continued efforts are required to develop laparoscopic renal hypothermia techniques and facilitate intrarenal suturing, while minimizing warm ischemia time.

摘要

目的

腹腔镜下部分肾切除术是一种新兴的微创、保留肾单位的治疗肾细胞癌的方法。我们在单一机构对7厘米及以下孤立性肾肿瘤患者行腹腔镜和开放性保留肾单位手术(NSS)后的围手术期结果进行了比较。

材料与方法

自1999年9月起,我们机构连续100例患者因散发性单发性7厘米及以下肾肿瘤接受了腹腔镜下部分肾切除术。自1998年4月起,一组100例符合类似纳入标准的同期患者接受了开放性NSS。由于我们的腹腔镜技术基于已确立的开放手术原则,两种方法相似,包括短暂的肾血管控制、在无血视野中锐性切除肿瘤、必要时进行肾盂肾盏修复、缝合结扎横断的肾内血管以及在支撑物上缝合修复肾实质缺损。对两组患者的人口统计学、术中、术后及短期随访数据进行回顾性比较。

结果

腹腔镜组肿瘤中位数大小为2.8厘米,开放组为3.3厘米(p = 0.005)。开放组中大于4厘米的肿瘤明显更多(p <0.001)。开放性手术组中孤立肾患者更多(p = 0.002)。开放组中更多患者因恶性肿瘤接受NSS(p = 0.02)。比较腹腔镜组与开放组,中位手术时间分别为3小时和3.9小时(p <0.001),失血量分别为125毫升和250毫升(p <0.001),平均热缺血时间分别为27.8分钟和17.5分钟(p <0.001)。腹腔镜组和开放组的中位镇痛需求量分别为20.2和252.5毫克硫酸吗啡当量(p <0.001),住院时间分别为2天和5天(p <0.001),平均康复时间分别为4周和6周(p <0.001)。两组术前血清肌酐中位数(1.0对1.0毫克/分升,p = 0.52)和术后血清肌酐中位数(1.1对1.2毫克/分升,p = 0.65)相似。无肾脏因热缺血损伤而丢失。腹腔镜组有3例患者手术切缘阳性,而开放组无(3%对0%,p = 0.1)。腹腔镜NSS与更高的术中主要并发症发生率相关(5%对0%,p = 0.02)。术后总体并发症无显著差异,尽管肾/泌尿系统并发症在腹腔镜组更常见(11%对2%,p = 0.01)。

结论

开放性手术部分肾切除术仍是保留肾单位治疗肾肿瘤的既定标准。应用于小肾肿瘤时,腹腔镜手术方法与更长的肾热缺血时间、更多的术中主要并发症及更多的术后泌尿系统并发症相关。我们的数据还表明,采用腹腔镜手术方法时需要更刻意地努力以获得更宽的手术切缘。尽管如此,我们的数据表明,就肾功能结果而言,腹腔镜NSS正在成为一种有效的微创治疗方法,还具有减少术后麻醉药物使用、更早出院及更快康复的额外优势。需要继续努力开发腹腔镜肾低温技术并促进肾内缝合,同时尽量缩短热缺血时间。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验