Henry Ford Hospital, Vattikuti Urology Institute, Detroit, Michigan 48202-2689, USA.
Eur Urol. 2010 Feb;57(2):310-6. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.11.024. Epub 2009 Nov 13.
Minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (PN) is most commonly performed for renal tumors < or =4 cm in size. Robotic PN (RPN) for tumors >4 cm has not been assessed.
To evaluate the safety and feasibility of RPN for tumors >4 cm in the context of patients undergoing RPN for tumors < or =4 cm.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We reviewed data for 71 consecutive patients who underwent transperitoneal RPN at a tertiary care center between August 2007 and September 2009 by a single surgeon. Patients were stratified into two groups: 15 with tumors >4 cm on preoperative imaging (group 1) and 56 patients with tumors < or =4 cm (group 2).
All patients underwent transperitoneal RPN by a single surgeon.
Preoperative, perioperative, pathologic, and functional outcomes data were analyzed and compared between groups. We used chi(2) and student t tests for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Mean radiographic tumor size was 5.0 cm (4.1-7.9) for group 1 and 2.1cm (0.7-3.8) for group 2. No significant differences were found between groups for estimated blood loss, total operative time, hospital stay, complication rates, and change in estimated glomerular filtration rate. Patients with larger tumors had longer median warm ischemia times (25 vs 20 min; p=0.011). Limitations of our study include the retrospective nature the analysis, small sample size, and single-surgeon experience.
In our initial experience, RPN for tumors >4 cm is safe and feasible, showing comparable outcomes to RPN for smaller tumors, although with longer warm ischemia times. Future studies with extended follow-up are necessary to determine the viability of RPN for large tumors as an effective form of treatment.
微创部分肾切除术(PN)最常用于治疗大小≤4cm 的肾肿瘤。对于>4cm 的肿瘤,机器人 PN(RPN)尚未进行评估。
评估在同一术者为大小≤4cm 的肿瘤行 RPN 的基础上,为>4cm 的肿瘤行 RPN 的安全性和可行性。
设计、地点和参与者:我们回顾性分析了 2007 年 8 月至 2009 年 9 月期间在一家三级医疗中心由同一位外科医师施行的 71 例连续接受经腹腔 RPN 的患者资料。患者分为两组:术前影像学检查显示肿瘤>4cm 的 15 例患者(组 1)和肿瘤≤4cm 的 56 例患者(组 2)。
所有患者均由同一位外科医师行经腹腔 RPN。
分析和比较了两组患者的术前、围手术期、病理和功能结果数据。我们分别使用卡方检验和学生 t 检验分析分类变量和连续变量。p 值<0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。
组 1 患者的平均影像学肿瘤大小为 5.0cm(4.1-7.9),组 2 患者的平均肿瘤大小为 2.1cm(0.7-3.8)。两组患者的估计失血量、总手术时间、住院时间、并发症发生率和估算肾小球滤过率变化等方面无显著差异。肿瘤较大的患者中位热缺血时间较长(25 分钟对 20 分钟;p=0.011)。本研究的局限性包括分析的回顾性、样本量小和单一术者经验。
在我们的初步经验中,为>4cm 的肿瘤行 RPN 是安全可行的,与为较小肿瘤行 RPN 的结果相当,尽管热缺血时间较长。需要进一步的前瞻性研究,进行长期随访,以确定 RPN 治疗大肿瘤作为一种有效治疗方法的可行性。