• 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

机器人辅助肾肿物剜除术:夹闭与非夹闭方法的比较

Robotic-assisted enucleation for renal masses: A comparison of on-clamp and off-clamp approach.

作者信息

Rac Goran, James Christopher, Ellis Jeffrey L, Barton Gregory J, Blackwell Robert H, Gupta Gopal N

机构信息

Department of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA.

Department of Urology, Southern Illinois University, Springfield, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

J Surg Oncol. 2024 Oct;130(5):1097-1103. doi: 10.1002/jso.27810. Epub 2024 Aug 13.

DOI:10.1002/jso.27810
PMID:39138890
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11654896/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

In surgically excising renal masses, studies have demonstrated that tumor enucleation is an effective option. However, there is limited literature comparing off-clamp to on-clamp tumor enucleation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 189 patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy via tumor enucleation by a single surgeon from March 2012 and April 2022. Patients were stratified based on use of renal hilar clamping intraoperatively. Surgical, oncologic, and renal functional outcomes were captured. Variables were analyzed and compared between the two groups using Student's T-tests and Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Of 189 procedures analyzed, 124 were performed on-clamp and 65 were performed off-clamp. There were no differences in patient demographics or average length of follow-up. There were no differences in estimated blood loss, complications, or hospital length of stay. Recurrence rates were similar for the two groups. The absolute difference in estimated glomerular filtration rate change between the two groups at time of first follow-up was not significant (p = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no significant difference in perioperative outcomes such as surgical time, blood loss, or complications between the two groups. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in postoperative kidney function between the two techniques.

摘要

引言

在手术切除肾肿物方面,研究表明肿瘤剜除术是一种有效的选择。然而,比较非阻断性与阻断性肿瘤剜除术的文献有限。

材料与方法

我们回顾性分析了2012年3月至2022年4月间由同一位外科医生通过肿瘤剜除术实施机器人辅助腹腔镜肾部分切除术的189例患者的病历。根据术中是否使用肾门阻断对患者进行分层。记录手术、肿瘤学及肾功能相关结局。使用学生t检验和卡方检验对两组间的变量进行分析和比较。

结果

在分析的189例手术中,124例为阻断性手术,65例为非阻断性手术。患者人口统计学特征及平均随访时间无差异。估计失血量、并发症及住院时间无差异。两组的复发率相似。首次随访时两组间估计肾小球滤过率变化的绝对差异无统计学意义(p = 0.25)。

结论

两组间围手术期结局如手术时间、失血量或并发症方面无显著差异。此外,两种技术在术后肾功能方面也无显著差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c23a/11654896/499f66590ef9/JSO-130-1097-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c23a/11654896/499f66590ef9/JSO-130-1097-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c23a/11654896/499f66590ef9/JSO-130-1097-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Robotic-assisted enucleation for renal masses: A comparison of on-clamp and off-clamp approach.机器人辅助肾肿物剜除术:夹闭与非夹闭方法的比较
J Surg Oncol. 2024 Oct;130(5):1097-1103. doi: 10.1002/jso.27810. Epub 2024 Aug 13.
2
Comparing Zero Ischemia Laparoscopic Radio Frequency Ablation Assisted Tumor Enucleation and Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for Clinical T1a Renal Tumor: A Randomized Clinical Trial.比较零缺血腹腔镜射频消融辅助肿瘤剜除术与腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗 T1a 期肾癌:一项随机临床试验。
J Urol. 2016 Jun;195(6):1677-83. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.115. Epub 2016 Feb 22.
3
Assessing the Trade-off Between the Safety and Effectiveness of Off-clamp Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Masses with a High RENAL Score: A Propensity Score-matched Comparison of Perioperative and Functional Outcomes in a Multicenter Analysis.评估高 RENAL 评分的肾肿瘤无夹闭机器人部分肾切除术的安全性和有效性权衡:多中心分析中围手术期和功能结果的倾向评分匹配比较。
Eur Urol Focus. 2023 Nov;9(6):1037-1043. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.05.009. Epub 2023 May 30.
4
Robotic partial nephrectomy with superselective versus main artery clamping: a retrospective comparison.机器人辅助部分肾切除术超选择性夹闭与主动脉夹闭的回顾性比较。
Eur Urol. 2014 Oct;66(4):713-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.017. Epub 2014 Jan 25.
5
Off-clamp vs on-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy: Perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes from a propensity-score matching between two high-volume centers.离夹与夹闭机器人辅助部分肾切除术:来自两个高容量中心的倾向评分匹配的围手术期、功能和肿瘤学结果。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019 Jul;45(7):1232-1237. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.12.005. Epub 2018 Dec 9.
6
Predictors of the Transition from Off to On Clamp Approach during Ongoing Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Data from the CLOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.机器人辅助部分肾切除术期间从离断钳转为夹闭钳方法的转换预测因素:来自 CLOCK 随机临床试验的数据。
J Urol. 2019 Jul;202(1):62-68. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000194. Epub 2019 Jun 7.
7
Impact of Renal Hilar Control on Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Systematic Review and Cumulative Meta-analysis.肾门控制对机器人辅助部分肾切除术结局的影响:系统评价和累积荟萃分析。
Eur Urol Focus. 2019 Jul;5(4):619-635. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.01.012. Epub 2018 Jul 14.
8
Off-clamp versus complete hilar control laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: comparison by clinical stage.离断与完全阻断控制腹腔镜肾部分切除术:按临床分期比较。
BJU Int. 2012 May;109(9):1376-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10592.x. Epub 2011 Oct 12.
9
Off-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy does not benefit short-term renal function: a matched cohort analysis.非阻断机器人辅助部分肾切除术对短期肾功能无益处:一项匹配队列分析。
J Robot Surg. 2018 Sep;12(3):401-407. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0745-6. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
10
Off-clamp laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: oncologic and renal functional outcomes.无阻断腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗肾门肿瘤:肿瘤学和肾功能结局。
J Endourol. 2014 Feb;28(2):191-5. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0440. Epub 2013 Dec 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Off-clamp robot-assisted nephron-sparing surgery is associated with less operative time and potential for vascular complication in the treatment of renal angiomyolipoma > 4 cm: a comparative study.非阻断机器人辅助保留肾单位手术治疗直径>4cm肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤时,手术时间更短且血管并发症风险更低:一项对比研究。
BMC Urol. 2025 Jul 3;25(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s12894-025-01836-1.

本文引用的文献

1
Cancer statistics, 2023.癌症统计数据,2023 年。
CA Cancer J Clin. 2023 Jan;73(1):17-48. doi: 10.3322/caac.21763.
2
Robotic Off-Clamp Simple Enucleation Single-Layer Renorrhaphy Partial Nephrectomy (ROSS): Surgical Insights after an Initial Experience.机器人辅助无阻断简单剜除单层肾缝合术部分肾切除术(ROSS):初步经验后的手术见解
J Clin Med. 2022 Dec 27;12(1):198. doi: 10.3390/jcm12010198.
3
Epidemiology of Renal Cell Carcinoma: 2022 Update.肾细胞癌的流行病学:2022 年更新。
Eur Urol. 2022 Nov;82(5):529-542. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.08.019. Epub 2022 Sep 10.
4
Transperitoneal Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy with Minimum Follow-up of 5 Years: Oncological and Functional Outcomes from a Single Institution.经腹腔机器人辅助部分肾切除术:单中心 5 年以上随访的肿瘤学和功能结果。
Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Mar;2(2):207-213. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.06.012. Epub 2018 Jul 14.
5
Tumor-parenchyma interface and long-term oncologic outcomes after robotic tumor enucleation for sporadic renal cell carcinoma.散发性肾细胞癌机器人肿瘤剜除术后的肿瘤-实质界面与长期肿瘤学结局
Urol Oncol. 2018 Dec;36(12):527.e1-527.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.08.014. Epub 2018 Sep 27.
6
Impact of the off-clamp endoscopic robot-assisted simple enucleation (ERASE) of clinical T1 renal tumors on the postoperative renal function: Results from a matched-pair comparison.无夹闭内镜机器人辅助单纯剜除术(ERASE)治疗临床 T1 期肾肿瘤对术后肾功能的影响:一项配对比较研究结果。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018 Jun;44(6):853-858. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.01.093. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
7
Ischemia and Functional Recovery from Partial Nephrectomy: Refined Perspectives.部分肾切除术的缺血与功能恢复:更精确的观点。
Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Jul;4(4):572-578. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.02.001. Epub 2017 Mar 3.
8
Functional Comparison of Renal Tumor Enucleation Versus Standard Partial Nephrectomy.肾肿瘤剜除术与标准部分肾切除术的功能比较。
Eur Urol Focus. 2017 Oct;3(4-5):437-443. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.06.002. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
9
Surgical Techniques in the Management of Small Renal Masses.小肾肿瘤治疗中的手术技术
Urol Clin North Am. 2017 May;44(2):233-242. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2016.12.009. Epub 2017 Mar 14.
10
Tumor Enucleation for Renal Cell Carcinoma.肾细胞癌的肿瘤剜除术
J Kidney Cancer VHL. 2015 Apr 4;2(2):64-69. doi: 10.15586/jkcvhl.2015.27. eCollection 2015.