• 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

从腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术转换为机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术:肿瘤学结局和并发症的比较

Switching from laparoscopic radical prostatectomy to robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparing oncological outcomes and complications.

作者信息

Johnson Ida, Ottosson Fredrik, Diep Lien My, Berg Rolf Eigil, Hoff Jon-Roar, Wessel Nicolai, Eri Lars Magne, Berge Viktor

机构信息

a Department of Urology , Sørlandet Hospital , Arendal , Norway.

b Department of Urology , Oslo University Hospital , Oslo , Norway.

出版信息

Scand J Urol. 2018 Apr;52(2):116-121. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1420099. Epub 2018 Jan 15.

DOI:10.1080/21681805.2017.1420099
PMID:29334304
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare oncological outcomes and complication rates based on the Clavien classification between laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (RALP).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a prospective quality registry clinical data were consecutively entered for 544 LRP and 1081 RALP patients operated from 2003 to the end of 2012. Complications within 90 days postoperatively were assessed according to the Clavien classification and compared between LRP and RALP patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses of logistic regression were used to fit oncological outcomes and complication data.

RESULTS

The mean operation time was 213 and 135 minutes in LRP and RALP patients, respectively. Pathological T3a stage (pT3a) in the RALP group was more frequent than in the LRP group, 32.4% versus 17.8%, respectively. For pT2 tumours, positive surgical margins (PSM) rate for LRP and RALP, was 20.3% vs 10.6%, respectively (p < .001). In the LRP group 74 patients (13.6%) reported 104 and in the RALP group 141 patients (13.0%) reported 177 complications (p = .75). Seventeen (3.1%) LRP patients and 15 (1.4%) RALP patients had Clavien grade IIIb complications (p = .017). Surgical reintervention was necessary in 14 patients (2.6%) and 17 patients (1.6%) in the LRP and RALP group, respectively (p = .04).

CONCLUSION

Switching from LRP to RALP resulted in a much shorter operation time without compromising oncological outcome. There was no statistically significant difference in overall complication-rates between LRP and RALP. However, LRP patients had more serious complications and increased need for surgical reintervention compared to RALP patients.

摘要

目的

基于Clavien分类比较腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(LRP)与机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(RALP)的肿瘤学结局和并发症发生率。

材料与方法

在一项前瞻性质量登记研究中,连续录入了2003年至2012年底接受手术的544例LRP患者和1081例RALP患者的临床数据。根据Clavien分类评估术后90天内的并发症,并在LRP和RALP患者之间进行比较。采用逻辑回归的单因素和多因素分析来拟合肿瘤学结局和并发症数据。

结果

LRP和RALP患者的平均手术时间分别为213分钟和135分钟。RALP组的病理T3a期(pT3a)比LRP组更常见,分别为32.4%和17.8%。对于pT2肿瘤,LRP和RALP的手术切缘阳性(PSM)率分别为20.3%和10.6%(p < 0.001)。LRP组74例患者(13.6%)报告了104例并发症,RALP组141例患者(13.0%)报告了177例并发症(p = 0.75)。17例(3.1%)LRP患者和15例(1.4%)RALP患者发生Clavien IIIb级并发症(p = 0.017)。LRP组和RALP组分别有14例患者(2.6%)和17例患者(1.6%)需要进行手术再次干预(p = 0.04)。

结论

从LRP转换为RALP可显著缩短手术时间,且不影响肿瘤学结局。LRP和RALP的总体并发症发生率无统计学显著差异。然而,与RALP患者相比,LRP患者的并发症更严重,手术再次干预的需求增加。

相似文献

1
Switching from laparoscopic radical prostatectomy to robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparing oncological outcomes and complications.从腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术转换为机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术:肿瘤学结局和并发症的比较
Scand J Urol. 2018 Apr;52(2):116-121. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1420099. Epub 2018 Jan 15.
2
Comparison of outcomes between pure laparoscopic vs robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a study of comparative effectiveness based upon validated quality of life outcomes.纯腹腔镜与机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的疗效比较:基于经过验证的生活质量结局的比较效果研究。
BJU Int. 2012 Mar;109(6):898-905. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10551.x. Epub 2011 Sep 20.
3
Comparison of anesthetic management and outcomes of robot-assisted vs pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.机器人辅助与单纯腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的麻醉管理及结果比较。
J Clin Anesth. 2016 Dec;35:281-286. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.08.014. Epub 2016 Oct 10.
4
Comparisons of the perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted versus pure extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.机器人辅助与纯腹膜外腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的围手术期、功能和肿瘤学结果比较。
Eur Urol. 2014 Mar;65(3):610-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.049. Epub 2012 Dec 1.
5
Comparison of urinary continence outcome between robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺切除术与腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术尿控结果的比较。
J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 Apr;97(4):393-8.
6
Preliminary results of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) after fellowship training and experience in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). fellowship 培训及腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(LRP)经验后机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(RALP)的初步结果。
BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110 Suppl 4:64-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11479.x.
7
Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?经耻骨后、腹腔镜和机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的比较:谁是赢家?
World J Urol. 2018 Apr;36(4):609-621. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2174-1. Epub 2018 Jan 23.
8
Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy.原发前列腺癌手术治疗中切缘阳性率和围手术期并发症发生率的系统评价和荟萃分析:比较经耻骨后、腹腔镜和机器人前列腺切除术。
Eur Urol. 2012 Jul;62(1):1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.02.029. Epub 2012 Feb 24.
9
Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy learning curve for experienced laparoscopic surgeons: does it really exist?经验丰富的腹腔镜外科医生进行机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的学习曲线:它真的存在吗?
Int Braz J Urol. 2016 Jan-Feb;42(1):83-9. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0485.
10
Inguinal Hernia Repair During Extraperitoneal Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy.腹膜外机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术期间的腹股沟疝修补术
J Endourol. 2016 Feb;30(2):208-11. doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0393. Epub 2015 Nov 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Surgical Technique and Perioperative Outcomes of the "Sapienza" Urology Residency Program's Trocar Placement Configuration During Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP): A Retrospective, Single-Centre Observational Study Comparing Experienced Attendings vs. Post-Graduate Year I-III Residents as Bedside Assistants.“萨皮恩扎”泌尿外科住院医师培训项目在机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)中套管针放置配置的手术技术及围手术期结果:一项回顾性单中心观察性研究,比较经验丰富的主治医生与第一年至第三年住院医师作为床边助手的情况。
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Dec 25;17(1):20. doi: 10.3390/cancers17010020.
2
Wound infection in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with retropubic radical prostate surgery: A meta-analysis.机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术的伤口感染比较:一项荟萃分析。
Int Wound J. 2023 Nov;20(9):3550-3557. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14228. Epub 2023 Sep 7.
3
Functional Preservation and Oncologic Control following Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Intermediate- and High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.机器人辅助与腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术治疗中高危局限性前列腺癌后的功能保留与肿瘤控制:一项倾向评分匹配分析
J Oncol. 2021 Dec 21;2021:4375722. doi: 10.1155/2021/4375722. eCollection 2021.
4
Functional and Oncological Outcomes Following Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer With a Large Prostate Volume: A Retrospective Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-Ups.机器人辅助与腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术治疗大体积局限性前列腺癌后的功能和肿瘤学结果:一项至少随访2年的回顾性分析
Front Oncol. 2021 Sep 23;11:714680. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.714680. eCollection 2021.
5
Role of laparoscopy in the era of robotic surgery in urology in developing countries.腹腔镜检查在发展中国家泌尿外科机器人手术时代的作用。
Indian J Urol. 2021 Jan-Mar;37(1):32-41. doi: 10.4103/iju.IJU_252_20. Epub 2021 Jan 1.
6
Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes.机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术与标准腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术:基于证据的比较结果分析。
World J Urol. 2021 Oct;39(10):3721-3732. doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03687-5. Epub 2021 Apr 11.
7
A novel "three-port" trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.一种用于腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的新型“三孔”套管针置入技术。
World J Surg Oncol. 2020 Oct 27;18(1):279. doi: 10.1186/s12957-020-02051-y.
8
Comparison Between Robotic and Laparoscopic or Open Anastomoses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.机器人手术与腹腔镜或开放吻合术的比较:系统评价与荟萃分析
Robot Surg. 2019 Dec 23;6:27-40. doi: 10.2147/RSRR.S186768. eCollection 2019.