• 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

相似文献

1
Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper-tract urothelial cancer: A population-based assessment of costs and perioperative outcomes.机器人辅助与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:基于人群的成本和围手术期结果评估。
Can Urol Assoc J. 2014 Sep;8(9-10):E695-701. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.2051.
2
Is Robotic Superior to Laparoscopic Approach for Radical Nephroureterectomy with Bladder Cuff Excision in Treating Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma?在治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌时,机器人辅助根治性肾输尿管切除术加膀胱袖状切除术是否优于腹腔镜手术?
J Endourol. 2023 Feb;37(2):139-146. doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0154. Epub 2022 Nov 18.
3
Robot-assisted vs. laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on comparative studies.机器人辅助与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:基于比较研究的系统评价和荟萃分析
Front Oncol. 2022 Aug 3;12:964256. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.964256. eCollection 2022.
4
Propensity-score-matched comparison of perioperative outcomes between open and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy: a national series.开放性与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术围手术期结局的倾向评分匹配比较:一项全国性系列研究。
Eur Urol. 2012 Apr;61(4):715-21. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.12.026. Epub 2011 Dec 22.
5
Laparoscopic vs robotic nephroureterectomy: Is it time to re-establish the standard? Evidence from a systematic review.腹腔镜与机器人辅助肾输尿管切除术:是时候重新确立标准了吗?一项系统评价的证据
Arab J Urol. 2017 Jun 16;15(3):177-186. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2017.05.002. eCollection 2017 Sep.
6
Contemporary Trends of Systemic Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Intravesical Chemotherapy in Patients With Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinomas Undergoing Minimally Invasive or Open Radical Nephroureterectomy: Analysis of US Claims on Perioperative Outcomes and Health Care Costs.微创或开放性根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路上皮癌患者的全身新辅助和辅助膀胱内化疗的当代趋势:美国围手术期结局和医疗保健成本索赔分析。
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2022 Apr;20(2):198.e1-198.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2021.11.016. Epub 2021 Dec 24.
7
Systematic review of open versus laparoscopic versus robot-assisted nephroureterectomy.开放性与腹腔镜下及机器人辅助肾输尿管切除术的系统评价
Rev Urol. 2017;19(1):32-43. doi: 10.3909/riu0691.
8
Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Nephroureterectomy Approaches in Patients with Upper-Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.腹腔镜与机器人肾盂输尿管癌根治术治疗上尿路上皮癌的围手术期结局和并发症比较。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Jun;30(6):3805-3816. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13221-z. Epub 2023 Mar 6.
9
Robot-assisted nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: results from three high-volume robotic surgery institutions.机器人辅助肾盂输尿管癌根治术:来自三个高容量机器人手术机构的结果。
J Robot Surg. 2020 Feb;14(1):211-219. doi: 10.1007/s11701-019-00965-8. Epub 2019 Apr 30.
10
Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术;系统评价与荟萃分析。
BJUI Compass. 2023 Jan 22;4(3):246-255. doi: 10.1002/bco2.208. eCollection 2023 May.

引用本文的文献

1
Open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma Comparing outcomes and the tetrafecta as a composite marker of surgery quality.开放性、腹腔镜及机器人辅助根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:比较手术效果及将“四连胜”作为手术质量的综合指标
Can Urol Assoc J. 2025 Jul;19(7):E219-E228. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.9039.
2
Robotic surgery of the urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract single surgeon initial experience, 66 consecutive cases.机器人手术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:单外科医生的初步经验,66 例连续病例。
BMC Urol. 2024 Nov 1;24(1):238. doi: 10.1186/s12894-024-01629-y.
3
A Retrospective Single-Center Comparative Study Between Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Radical Nephroureterectomy for Upper-Tract Urothelial Carcinoma on Perioperative Results, Overall Survival, and Recurrence Rate.一项关于机器人辅助根治性肾输尿管切除术与腹腔镜根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌的围手术期结果、总生存率和复发率的回顾性单中心比较研究。
Cureus. 2024 Aug 11;16(8):e66623. doi: 10.7759/cureus.66623. eCollection 2024 Aug.
4
Perioperative, renal function and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy for patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.机器人辅助根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌患者的围手术期、肾功能和肿瘤学结果。
World J Urol. 2023 Nov;41(11):3001-3007. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04590-x. Epub 2023 Sep 7.
5
Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术;系统评价与荟萃分析。
BJUI Compass. 2023 Jan 22;4(3):246-255. doi: 10.1002/bco2.208. eCollection 2023 May.
6
Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Nephroureterectomy Approaches in Patients with Upper-Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.腹腔镜与机器人肾盂输尿管癌根治术治疗上尿路上皮癌的围手术期结局和并发症比较。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Jun;30(6):3805-3816. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13221-z. Epub 2023 Mar 6.
7
Robot-assisted vs. laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on comparative studies.机器人辅助与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:基于比较研究的系统评价和荟萃分析
Front Oncol. 2022 Aug 3;12:964256. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.964256. eCollection 2022.
8
The nephroureterectomy: a review of technique and current controversies.肾输尿管切除术:技术回顾与当前争议
Transl Androl Urol. 2020 Dec;9(6):3168-3190. doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.12.07.
9
Controversies in management of the bladder cuff at nephroureterectomy.肾输尿管切除术膀胱袖口处理的争议
Transl Androl Urol. 2020 Aug;9(4):1868-1880. doi: 10.21037/tau.2020.01.17.
10
Robotic versus other nephroureterectomy techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 87,000 cases.机器人与其他肾输尿管切除术技术的比较:超过 87000 例病例的系统评价和荟萃分析。
World J Urol. 2020 Apr;38(4):845-852. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-03020-1. Epub 2019 Nov 26.

本文引用的文献

1
Practice patterns and outcomes of open and minimally invasive partial nephrectomy since the introduction of robotic partial nephrectomy: results from the nationwide inpatient sample.自机器人辅助部分肾切除术问世以来,开放和微创部分肾切除术的实践模式和结果:来自全国住院患者样本的结果。
J Urol. 2014 Apr;191(4):907-12. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.10.099. Epub 2013 Oct 29.
2
Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a multi-institutional series.机器人辅助肾盂输尿管癌根治术的围手术期结果:多机构系列研究。
BJU Int. 2013 Aug;112(4):E295-300. doi: 10.1111/bju.12163.
3
Intermediate-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma.机器人辅助腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌的中期结果。
Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2013 Dec;11(4):515-21. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2013.04.027. Epub 2013 Jun 27.
4
EAU guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology.EAU 指南:泌尿外科机器人和单部位手术
Eur Urol. 2013 Aug;64(2):277-91. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.034. Epub 2013 May 25.
5
European guidelines on upper tract urothelial carcinomas: 2013 update.欧洲上尿路尿路上皮癌指南:2013 年更新版。
Eur Urol. 2013 Jun;63(6):1059-71. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.032. Epub 2013 Mar 19.
6
Cancer statistics, 2013.癌症统计数据,2013 年。
CA Cancer J Clin. 2013 Jan;63(1):11-30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21166. Epub 2013 Jan 17.
7
Trends in renal surgery: robotic technology is associated with increased use of partial nephrectomy.肾脏手术趋势:机器人技术的应用与部分肾切除术的增加相关。
J Urol. 2013 Apr;189(4):1229-35. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.024. Epub 2012 Oct 17.
8
Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: the differential effect of regionalization, procedure volume and operative approach.机器人辅助与开放性根治性前列腺切除术:区域化、手术量和手术入路的差异影响。
J Urol. 2013 Apr;189(4):1289-94. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.028. Epub 2012 Oct 22.
9
Hospitalization costs for radical prostatectomy attributable to robotic surgery.机器人手术导致的根治性前列腺切除术的住院费用。
Eur Urol. 2013 Jul;64(1):11-6. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.012. Epub 2012 Aug 20.
10
Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States.美国泌尿科医师中当代开放性和机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的实践模式。
J Urol. 2012 Jun;187(6):2087-92. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.061. Epub 2012 Apr 11.

机器人辅助与腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:基于人群的成本和围手术期结果评估。

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper-tract urothelial cancer: A population-based assessment of costs and perioperative outcomes.

作者信息

Trudeau Vincent, Gandaglia Giorgio, Shiffmann Jonas, Popa Ioana, Shariat Shahrokh F, Montorsi Francesco, Perrotte Paul, Trinh Quoc-Dien, Karakiewicz Pierre I, Sun Maxine

机构信息

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, QC;

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, QC; ; Department of Urology, Vita-Salute, San Raffaele University Milan, Italy;

出版信息

Can Urol Assoc J. 2014 Sep;8(9-10):E695-701. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.2051.

DOI:10.5489/cuaj.2051
PMID:25408809
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4216301/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

We compared short-term outcomes and costs between robotic-assisted nephroureterectomy (RANU) and laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (LNU) in a large population-based cohort of patients with upper-tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC).

METHODS

Overall, 1914 patients with UTUC treated with RANU or LNU between 2008 and 2010 within the Nationwide Inpatient Sample were abstracted. Propensity-score matching was performed to account for inherent differences between patients undergoing RANU and LNU. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to compare postoperative complications, blood transfusions, prolonged length of stay, and costs between the 2 procedures.

RESULTS

Overall, a weighted estimate of 1199 (62.6%) and 715 (37.4%) patients received LNU and RANU, respectively. In multivariable analyses no significant differences were observed in postoperative transfusion and length of stay between the 2 surgical approaches (all p > 0.1). However, patients undergoing RANU were less likely to experience any complications compared to their counterparts undergoing LNU (p = 0.04). The utilization of RANU was associated with substantially higher costs compared to the laparoscopic approach. Our study is limited by its retrospective nature and the lack of adjustment for tumour stage and grade.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the safety and feasibility of RANU for the treatment of UTUC. Indeed, the use of the robotic approach was associated with lower probability of experiencing perioperative complications compared to LNU. On the other hand, the utilization of RANU is associated with higher costs compared to LNU.

摘要

引言

我们在一个基于人群的大型上尿路尿路上皮癌(UTUC)患者队列中,比较了机器人辅助肾输尿管切除术(RANU)和腹腔镜根治性肾输尿管切除术(LNU)的短期疗效和成本。

方法

从2008年至2010年全国住院患者样本中,提取了1914例接受RANU或LNU治疗的UTUC患者。进行倾向评分匹配以解释接受RANU和LNU患者之间的固有差异。采用多变量逻辑回归模型比较两种手术的术后并发症、输血情况、住院时间延长以及成本。

结果

总体而言,加权估计分别有1199例(62.6%)和715例(37.4%)患者接受了LNU和RANU。在多变量分析中,两种手术方式在术后输血和住院时间方面未观察到显著差异(所有p>0.1)。然而,与接受LNU的患者相比,接受RANU的患者发生任何并发症的可能性较小(p=0.04)。与腹腔镜手术相比,RANU的使用与更高的成本相关。我们的研究受其回顾性性质以及缺乏对肿瘤分期和分级的调整的限制。

结论

我们的结果支持RANU治疗UTUC的安全性和可行性。实际上,与LNU相比,机器人手术方法的使用与围手术期并发症发生概率较低相关。另一方面,与LNU相比,RANU的使用与更高的成本相关。