Wang Sheng-zheng, Chen Ling-wu, Chen Wei, Chen Jun-xing, Lin Huan-yi
Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Int J Urol. 2009 Apr;16(4):360-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2009.02267.x. Epub 2009 Feb 24.
To compare hand-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy (HALRC) with the standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) in an attempt to delineate their role in bladder cancer treatment.
We retrospectively analyzed 51 patients who underwent HALRC (HALRC group, 31 cases) or LRC (LRC group, 20 cases). Urinary diversion was performed extracorporeally through the hand port or the incision for specimen retrieval, respectively, in the two groups. Baseline patient characteristics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated.
There was no statistically significant difference in age, sex, body mass index, previous abdominal surgeries, or tumor stage between the two groups. Although the LRC group yielded a significantly smaller incision for urinary diversion than the HALRC group (7.3 cm vs 6.2 cm, P < 0.05), mean operative time, mean estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, time to oral intake and complications were similar in the two groups. Hernia formation was observed with increased frequency in the HALRC group. No patients in the HALRC group and only one patient (5%) in the LRC group presented a positive margin.
The HALRC group yielded the same outcomes as the LRC group, except with a larger incision. The hand-assisted approach might be preferred for obese patients or those having multiple previous abdominal surgeries.
比较手辅助腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(HALRC)与标准腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(LRC),以明确它们在膀胱癌治疗中的作用。
我们回顾性分析了51例行HALRC(HALRC组,31例)或LRC(LRC组,20例)的患者。两组分别通过手辅助通道或标本取出切口在体外进行尿流改道。评估患者的基线特征、术中参数和术后结果。
两组在年龄、性别、体重指数、既往腹部手术史或肿瘤分期方面无统计学显著差异。虽然LRC组尿流改道切口明显小于HALRC组(7.3 cm对6.2 cm,P<0.05),但两组的平均手术时间、平均估计失血量、输血率、开始经口进食时间和并发症相似。HALRC组疝形成的发生率更高。HALRC组无患者切缘阳性,LRC组仅1例患者(5%)切缘阳性。
HALRC组与LRC组结果相同,只是切口更大。对于肥胖患者或既往有多次腹部手术史的患者,手辅助方法可能更可取。