Suppr超能文献

在日本的初步病例系列中,比较机器人辅助部分肾切除术经腹腔和腹膜后入路的效果。

Comparison of the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approach in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in an initial case series in Japan.

机构信息

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery Related, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine , Kobe, Japan .

出版信息

J Endourol. 2013 Nov;27(11):1384-8. doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0641. Epub 2013 Sep 17.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the results from the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches in our initial case series of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in terms of surgical time, renal artery clamping time, postoperative renal function, adverse events, and surgical margin status.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The initial 26 consecutive RAPNs performed for solid renal tumors in our hospital were categorized by the approach used, transperitoneal or retroperitoneal, and compared for body mass index, tumor size, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score, PADUA score, tumor location, surgical time, renal artery clamping time, renal function change after surgery, operative blood loss, surgical margin status, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

The median tumor size was 25 mm (range 15-50). A transperitoneal approach was used in 16 patients and a retroperitoneal approach was used in 10 patients. There was no significant difference in renal tumor and patient characteristics between the two groups except tumor location (anterior tumor was significantly more in the transperitoneal approach and posterior tumor was significantly more in retroperitoneal approach (P=0.0144 and P=0.0100, respectively)). Operative time (239 ± 63.0 minutes in the transperitoneal group vs. 193 ± 40.6 minutes in the retroperitoneal group), warm ischemic time (24.3 ± 9.07 minutes in the transperitoneal group vs. 24.7 ± 8.35 minutes in the retroperitoneal group) and AEs (1/16 in the transperitoneal group vs. 1/10 in the retroperitoneal group; both cases were Clavien-Dindo grade I) did not show any significant difference between the two approaches (P=0.0792, 0.5485, and 0.7270, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The retroperitoneal approach in RAPN appears to be a safe and technically feasible minimally invasive option for nephron-sparing surgery, based on our initial case series, and showed equivalent outcomes to those of the transperitoneal approach even though it was an initial robotic renal surgery series. Future studies, including a larger number of cases, are planned to draw more definitive conclusions.

摘要

目的

比较经腹腔和后腹腔入路机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RAPN)在手术时间、肾动脉阻断时间、术后肾功能、不良事件和手术切缘状态方面的初步病例系列结果。

方法

将我院 26 例连续行 RAPN 治疗的肾脏实体肿瘤患者按入路(经腹腔或后腹腔)分为两组,比较两组患者的体重指数、肿瘤大小、RENAL 评分、PADUA 评分、肿瘤位置、手术时间、肾动脉阻断时间、术后肾功能变化、手术出血量、手术切缘状态和不良事件(AE)。

结果

肿瘤中位大小为 25mm(范围 15-50mm)。16 例患者采用经腹腔入路,10 例患者采用后腹腔入路。两组患者的肾脏肿瘤和患者特征无显著差异,除肿瘤位置外(经腹腔组前位肿瘤明显多于后腹腔组,后腹腔组后位肿瘤明显多于经腹腔组(P=0.0144 和 P=0.0100))。手术时间(经腹腔组 239±63.0 分钟 vs. 后腹腔组 193±40.6 分钟)、热缺血时间(经腹腔组 24.3±9.07 分钟 vs. 后腹腔组 24.7±8.35 分钟)和 AE(经腹腔组 1/16 vs. 后腹腔组 1/10;均为 Clavien-Dindo Ⅰ级)在两组间无显著差异(P=0.0792、0.5485 和 0.7270)。

结论

根据初步病例系列结果,RAPN 后腹腔入路似乎是一种安全且可行的微创保肾手术选择,与经腹腔入路相比,该入路具有同等的效果,即使这是一项初步的机器人肾脏手术系列研究。未来计划开展包括更多病例的研究,以得出更明确的结论。

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