• 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

由一位具备先进腹腔镜技术的非移植普通外科医生实施和学习腹腔镜供肾切除术。

Implementation and learning of laproscopic donor nephrectomy by a non-transplant general surgeon with advanced laparoscopic skills.

作者信息

Voskoboinik A, Gutman M J, Croagh D, Bell R, Saunder A, Gribbin J, Kanellis J

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Australia.

出版信息

Asian J Endosc Surg. 2011 Aug;4(3):127-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-5910.2011.00092.x. Epub 2011 Jun 20.

DOI:10.1111/j.1758-5910.2011.00092.x
PMID:22776276
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally performed by vascular surgeons or urologists, laparoscopic nephrectomy for live kidney donor transplantation has emerged as a new effective and safe technique. This study examines the implementation of this technique at our centre, as performed by a single general surgeon with expertise in advanced laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Patient records for 78 live donor transplants performed between February 2002 and September 2008 were divided into two groups (with 39 patients each) analyzed. A variety of outcome variables were compared. The same individual surgeon performed all laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) procedures.

RESULTS

A significant advantage was noted for LDN with respect to hospital stay (LDN 5.1 ± 1.1 days vs open donor nephrectomy [ODN] 6.4 ± 2.6 days, P=0.01) while ODN had a significant advantage with respect to operative time (LDN 241.1 ± 55.7 min vs ODN 152.0 ± 27.7 min, P<0.01). Within the LDN group, we noted a significant shortening in the operation time with each case as experience increased (see graph; P<0.01). The total postoperative complication rate was similar in both groups (LDN: 31% vs ODN: 44%, P=0.25). There was a trend towards more respiratory complications in ODN (ODN 11/39 [28%] vs LDN 5/39 [13%], P=0.09).

CONCLUSION

While implementing a new procedure may result in longer operative times initially, these improve with time, and our data demonstrates no compromise in patient safety or outcomes. The LDN procedure proved to be a desirable alternative to ODN, with shorter hospital stay and improved operator skills with each case, and without significant compromise in allograft recovery.

摘要

引言

活体肾移植的腹腔镜肾切除术传统上由血管外科医生或泌尿外科医生实施,现已成为一种新的有效且安全的技术。本研究探讨了由一位擅长高级腹腔镜手术的普通外科医生在我们中心实施该技术的情况。

方法

将2002年2月至2008年9月期间进行的78例活体供体移植患者记录分为两组(每组39例)进行分析。比较了各种结果变量。所有腹腔镜供体肾切除术(LDN)手术均由同一位外科医生实施。

结果

LDN在住院时间方面具有显著优势(LDN为5.1±1.1天,开放性供体肾切除术[ODN]为6.4±2.6天,P=0.01),而ODN在手术时间方面具有显著优势(LDN为241.1±55.7分钟,ODN为152.0±27.7分钟,P<0.01)。在LDN组中,随着经验的增加,每例手术时间显著缩短(见图;P<0.01)。两组术后总并发症发生率相似(LDN:31%,ODN:44%,P=0.25)。ODN发生呼吸并发症的趋势更明显(ODN为11/39[28%],LDN为5/39[13%],P=0.09)。

结论

虽然实施新手术最初可能会导致手术时间延长,但随着时间推移会有所改善,我们的数据表明患者安全性或结果并未受到影响。LDN手术被证明是ODN的理想替代方案,住院时间更短,且随着每例手术操作技能不断提高,同种异体肾恢复情况也未受到显著影响。

相似文献

1
Implementation and learning of laproscopic donor nephrectomy by a non-transplant general surgeon with advanced laparoscopic skills.由一位具备先进腹腔镜技术的非移植普通外科医生实施和学习腹腔镜供肾切除术。
Asian J Endosc Surg. 2011 Aug;4(3):127-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-5910.2011.00092.x. Epub 2011 Jun 20.
2
Laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy: a comparison with the open technique and how to reach quality standards: a single-center experience in Thailand.腹腔镜活体供肾肾切除术:与开放手术技术的比较以及如何达到质量标准:泰国单中心经验
Transplant Proc. 2011 Dec;43(10):3593-8. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.08.115.
3
Why potential live renal donors prefer laparoscopic nephrectomy: a survey of live donor attitudes.潜在活体肾供体为何更倾向于腹腔镜肾切除术:对活体供体态度的一项调查
BJU Int. 2007 Dec;100(6):1344-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07126.x. Epub 2007 Sep 11.
4
Comparison of laparoscopic and open donor nephrectomy: a randomized controlled trial.腹腔镜与开放性供肾切除术的比较:一项随机对照试验。
BJU Int. 2005 Apr;95(6):851-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05415.x.
5
Comparison of laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) and conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy at a single institution.单中心腹腔镜下单部位手术(LESS)与传统腹腔镜供肾切术的比较。
BJU Int. 2013 Jul;112(2):198-206. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11763.x. Epub 2013 Mar 11.
6
Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: impact on an established renal transplant program.腹腔镜供体肾切除术:对一个成熟肾移植项目的影响。
Am Surg. 2000 Dec;66(12):1132-5.
7
Laparoscopic vs open living donor nephrectomy: a contemporary series from one centre.腹腔镜与开放活体供肾肾切除术:来自一个中心的当代系列研究
BJU Int. 2006 Jul;98(1):133-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06265.x.
8
Long-term outcomes of living donor kidney transplants in pediatric recipients following laparoscopic vs. open donor nephrectomy.小儿受者接受腹腔镜与开放供肾肾切除术后活体供肾肾移植的长期预后
Pediatr Transplant. 2012 Dec;16(8):894-900. doi: 10.1111/petr.12008.
9
Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy vs. open live donor nephrectomy: a quality of life and functional study.腹腔镜供肾切除术与开放性活体供肾切除术:一项生活质量与功能研究。
Clin Transplant. 2005 Feb;19(1):102-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2004.00308.x.
10
Comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy and conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: donor and recipient outcomes.腹腔镜单部位供肾切取术与传统腹腔镜供肾切取术的比较:供者和受者结局。
Urology. 2011 Dec;78(6):1332-7. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.077. Epub 2011 Oct 11.

引用本文的文献

1
Perioperative Complications During Living Donor Nephrectomy: Results From a Multicenter Cohort Study.活体供肾肾切除术围手术期并发症:一项多中心队列研究的结果
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2019 Jul 18;6:2054358119857718. doi: 10.1177/2054358119857718. eCollection 2019.