• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

微创部分肾切除术治疗 T1b 和 T2a 期肾肿瘤的围手术期和肾功能结果。

Perioperative and renal function outcomes of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for T1b and T2a kidney tumors.

机构信息

Department of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY 14623, USA.

出版信息

J Endourol. 2012 Mar;26(3):244-8. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0384. Epub 2012 Jan 4.

DOI:10.1089/end.2011.0384
PMID:22192099
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare operative and functional outcomes of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MPN) and minimally invasive radical nephrectomy (MRN) for T(1b) and T(2a) renal tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent MPN or MRN for a localized, solitary renal mass 4 to 10 cm were included. Perioperative and renal function outcomes were compared. Propensity analysis was used to account for selection bias in type of nephrectomy when evaluating complication rates.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight patients underwent MRN and 45 underwent MPN between August 2004 and September 2010. Preoperative patient and tumor characteristics were similar between groups. Tumor size was larger in the MRN group (5.3 vs 6.8 cm, P<0.001). Operative times and positive margin rates were similar between the groups (P=0.956 and P=0.207, respectively). Estimated blood loss was higher in the MPN group (401.8 vs 157.1 mL, P<0.001), but transfusion rates were similar (P=0.225). Rates of intraoperative (P=0.724), postoperative (P=0.806), and high Clavien-grade postoperative complications (P=0.966) were similar. Propensity analysis indicated that the likelihood of any complication (odds ratio [OR] 0.810, confidence interval [CI] 0.331-1.982, P=0.645) or of a high-grade complication (OR 0.164, CI 0.011-2.513, P=0.194) was unrelated to type of nephrectomy. With similar preoperative renal function parameters, postoperative development of new stage III to V chronic kidney disease (CKD) was greater in the MRN group (58 vs 31%, P=0.011). Propensity analysis showed that the likelihood of new CKD was 2.8 times higher in the MRN group (P=0.048).

CONCLUSION

In selected patients and with appropriate surgical expertise, MPN can result in similar rates of complications but superior renal function outcomes in larger kidney tumors.

摘要

目的

比较微创部分肾切除术(MPN)和微创根治性肾切除术(MRN)治疗 T(1b)和 T(2a)期肾肿瘤的手术和功能结果。

患者与方法

纳入 2004 年 8 月至 2010 年 9 月期间接受 MPN 或 MRN 治疗的局限性、孤立性肾肿块 4 至 10cm 的所有患者。比较围手术期和肾功能结果。使用倾向分析来评估并发症发生率时,考虑到肾切除术类型的选择偏倚。

结果

108 例患者接受 MRN,45 例患者接受 MPN。两组患者术前特征和肿瘤特征相似。MRN 组肿瘤较大(5.3cm 与 6.8cm,P<0.001)。两组手术时间和阳性切缘率相似(P=0.956 和 P=0.207)。MPN 组估计出血量较高(401.8ml 与 157.1ml,P<0.001),但输血率相似(P=0.225)。术中(P=0.724)、术后(P=0.806)和高 Clavien 级术后并发症(P=0.966)发生率相似。倾向分析表明,任何并发症(比值比 [OR]0.810,置信区间 [CI]0.331-1.982,P=0.645)或高级别并发症(OR0.164,CI0.011-2.513,P=0.194)的发生与肾切除术类型无关。在具有相似术前肾功能参数的情况下,MRN 组术后新发 III 至 V 期慢性肾脏病(CKD)的发生率更高(58% 与 31%,P=0.011)。倾向分析显示,MRN 组新发 CKD 的可能性高 2.8 倍(P=0.048)。

结论

在选择合适的患者和手术技术时,MPN 可使较大肾脏肿瘤的并发症发生率相似,但肾功能结果更好。

相似文献

1
Perioperative and renal function outcomes of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for T1b and T2a kidney tumors.微创部分肾切除术治疗 T1b 和 T2a 期肾肿瘤的围手术期和肾功能结果。
J Endourol. 2012 Mar;26(3):244-8. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0384. Epub 2012 Jan 4.
2
Minimally invasive heminephrectomy: feasibility and outcomes.微创半肾切除术:可行性和结果。
J Endourol. 2012 Jul;26(7):866-70. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0534. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
3
Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy vs laparoscopic cryoablation for the small renal mass: redefining the minimally invasive 'gold standard'.机器人辅助部分肾切除术与腹腔镜冷冻消融术治疗小肾肿瘤:重新定义微创的“金标准”。
BJU Int. 2014 Jan;113(1):92-9. doi: 10.1111/bju.12252. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
4
Robotic partial nephrectomy: imperative vs elective indications.机器人辅助部分肾切除术:绝对适应证与选择性适应证。
Urology. 2012 Oct;80(4):833-7. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.06.045.
5
Propensity-score matched analysis comparing robot-assisted with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.倾向评分匹配分析:比较机器人辅助与腹腔镜下部分肾切除术
BJU Int. 2015 Mar;115(3):437-45. doi: 10.1111/bju.12774. Epub 2014 Aug 13.
6
Robotic and open partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors larger than 7 cm: a single-center experience.机器人辅助与开放性部分肾切除术治疗直径大于7厘米的局限性肾肿瘤:单中心经验
World J Urol. 2017 May;35(5):781-787. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1937-9. Epub 2016 Sep 23.
7
Laparoscopic radical versus partial nephrectomy for tumors >4 cm: intermediate-term oncologic and functional outcomes.腹腔镜根治性肾切除术与部分肾切除术治疗直径>4 cm肿瘤的中期肿瘤学及功能结局
Urology. 2009 May;73(5):1077-82. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.11.059.
8
A propensity-matched comparison of perioperative complications and of chronic kidney disease between robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and radiofrequency ablative therapy.机器人辅助腹腔镜肾部分切除术与射频消融治疗围手术期并发症及慢性肾脏病的倾向评分匹配比较。
Asian J Surg. 2015 Jul;38(3):126-33. doi: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2014.09.005. Epub 2014 Nov 4.
9
Partial vs radical nephrectomy for T1 renal tumours: an analysis from the British Association of Urological Surgeons Nephrectomy Audit.T1期肾肿瘤行部分肾切除术与根治性肾切除术的比较:来自英国泌尿外科医师协会肾切除术审计的分析
BJU Int. 2016 Jan;117(1):62-71. doi: 10.1111/bju.13114. Epub 2015 May 13.
10
Laparoscopic radical versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1bN0M0 renal tumors: comparison of perioperative, pathological, and functional outcomes.腹腔镜根治性与腹腔镜部分肾切除术治疗 T1bN0M0 期临床肾肿瘤:围手术期、病理和功能结局比较。
J Endourol. 2010 Oct;24(10):1603-7. doi: 10.1089/end.2009.0312.

引用本文的文献

1
Surgical Strategies in Renal Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Partial vs. Radical Nephrectomy Outcomes Across Tumor Stages.肾癌的手术策略:一项关于不同肿瘤分期下部分肾切除术与根治性肾切除术结果的荟萃分析
Qatar Med J. 2025 Jun 9;2025(2):54. doi: 10.5339/qmj.2025.54. eCollection 2025.
2
Comparison of Outcomes Between Partial and Radical Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors Larger Than Four Centimeters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.局部大于4厘米的肾肿瘤行腹腔镜部分肾切除术与根治性肾切除术的疗效比较:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
World J Oncol. 2024 Aug;15(4):625-639. doi: 10.14740/wjon1866. Epub 2024 Jul 5.
3
[Treatment of localized renal cell carcinoma].
[局限性肾细胞癌的治疗]
Urologie. 2024 Feb;63(2):176-183. doi: 10.1007/s00120-023-02272-5. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
4
Evaluation of predictive factors for i-CLARAS (intraoperative complications in laparoscopic renal and adrenal surgery): a multicentre international retrospective cohort study.评估 i-CLARAS(腹腔镜肾和肾上腺手术中的术中并发症)的预测因素:一项多中心国际回顾性队列研究。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jan 16;14(1):1372. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-51696-2.
5
Outcome of laparoscopic nephron sparing surgery using a Satinsky clamp for hilar control: a trusted tool (SKIMS experience).使用Satinsky钳控制肾门的腹腔镜保留肾单位手术的结果:一种可靠的工具(SKIMS经验)
Curr Urol. 2021 Sep;15(3):172-175. doi: 10.1097/CU9.0000000000000022. Epub 2021 May 20.
6
Partial Nephrectomy Versus Radical Nephrectomy for Clinical T2 or Higher Stage Renal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.临床T2期或更高分期肾肿瘤的部分肾切除术与根治性肾切除术:系统评价和荟萃分析
Front Oncol. 2021 Jun 10;11:680842. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.680842. eCollection 2021.
7
Comparison of the long-term follow-up and perioperative outcomes of partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy for 4 cm to 7 cm renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.4 cm 至 7 cm 肾细胞癌行部分切除术与根治性切除术的长期随访和围手术期结局比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Urol. 2019 Jun 7;19(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0480-6.
8
Ischemia Techniques in Nephron-sparing Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Surgical, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes.保留肾单位手术中的缺血技术:手术、肿瘤学和功能结局的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur Urol. 2019 Mar;75(3):477-491. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.005. Epub 2018 Oct 13.
9
Surgical Approach Does Not Impact Margin Status After Partial Nephrectomy for Large Renal Masses.手术入路对大体积肾肿瘤行部分肾切除术的切缘状态无影响。
J Endourol. 2019 Jan;33(1):50-60. doi: 10.1089/end.2018.0144.
10
Preserving Renal Function through Partial Nephrectomy Depends on Tumor Complexity in T1b Renal Tumors.通过部分肾切除术保留肾功能取决于T1b期肾肿瘤的肿瘤复杂性。
J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Mar;32(3):495-501. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.3.495.