Semerjian Alice, Zettervall Sara L, Amdur Richard, Jarrett Thomas W, Vaziri Khashayar
1 Department of Urology, George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Sciences , Washington, D.C.
2 Department of Surgery, George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Sciences , Washington, D.C.
J Endourol. 2015 Jul;29(7):830-7. doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0795. Epub 2015 Apr 8.
Prolonged operative time (ORT) is often considered a drawback to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) because of increased morbidity. Limited data exist comparing long laparoscopic ORT with similar or shorter open ORT. This study aims to identify ORT when a minimally invasive procedure becomes inferior to its open counterpart.
Minimally invasive and open total and partial nephrectomies and nephroureterectomies were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) from 2005 to 2012. Procedures were split into open and minimally invasive nephrectomy and then stratified into four ORT groups: 0 to 90 minutes, 91 minutes to 3 hours, 3 to 6 hours, and ≥ 6 hours. Thirty-day mortality and morbidity were analyzed. Univariate analysis was performed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. Significant univariate results were then tested using stepwise logistic regression, controlling for demographics, comorbidities, and preoperative treatments.
There were 14,813 patients identified. Both partial and total minimally invasive kidney procedures had significantly improved outcomes compared with open counterparts of similar ORT. In the total nephrectomy group, a minimally invasive approach had a lower rate of surgical site infections, sepsis, pneumonia, return to operating room, and overall length of stay when compared with open procedures of the same duration. Length of hospital stay decreased in MIS regardless of operative time, except when comparing minimally invasive cases longer than 6 hours with open cases less than 90 minutes. Transfusion rates also significantly decreased in minimally invasive total nephrectomy cases. In the partial nephrectomy group, similar outcomes were seen in terms of length of stay and infectious outcomes. Interestingly, transfusion risk was decreased in the open partial nephrectomy group when comparing cases less than 90 minutes with minimally invasive partial nephrectomies lasting 3 to 6 hours; otherwise there was no significant correlation with transfusion risk.
Minimally invasive operations are less morbid than open operations of similar ORT. Longer and likely more complex laparoscopic procedures continue to provide a benefit to patients when compared with shorter and possibly less complex open procedures. These data should be considered during a surgeon's preoperative and operative decision-making.
由于发病率增加,手术时间延长(ORT)通常被认为是微创手术(MIS)的一个缺点。关于长时间腹腔镜ORT与类似或更短开放ORT的比较数据有限。本研究旨在确定当微创手术不如开放手术时的ORT。
在2005年至2012年的国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)中确定了微创和开放的全肾及部分肾切除术以及肾输尿管切除术。手术分为开放和微创肾切除术,然后分为四个ORT组:0至90分钟、91分钟至3小时、3至6小时和≥6小时。分析了30天死亡率和发病率。使用卡方检验和Fisher精确检验进行单因素分析。然后使用逐步逻辑回归对显著的单因素结果进行检验,控制人口统计学、合并症和术前治疗。
共确定了14813例患者。与类似ORT的开放手术相比,部分和全肾微创肾脏手术的结果均有显著改善。在全肾切除组中,与相同持续时间的开放手术相比,微创方法的手术部位感染、败血症、肺炎、返回手术室和总住院时间的发生率较低。无论手术时间如何,MIS的住院时间均缩短,除非将超过6小时的微创病例与少于90分钟的开放病例进行比较。微创全肾切除病例的输血率也显著降低。在部分肾切除组中,住院时间和感染结果方面观察到类似的结果。有趣的是,当将少于90分钟的开放部分肾切除病例与持续3至6小时的微创部分肾切除病例进行比较时,开放部分肾切除组的输血风险降低;否则与输血风险无显著相关性。
与类似ORT的开放手术相比,微创手术的发病率更低。与较短且可能不太复杂的开放手术相比,更长且可能更复杂的腹腔镜手术继续为患者带来益处。这些数据应在外科医生的术前和手术决策过程中予以考虑。