期刊文献+

机器人辅助腹腔镜与后腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗早期肾癌的疗效比较 被引量:4

Comparative study between robotic-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in treatment of early renal carcinoma
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较机器人辅助经腹腹腔镜肾部分切除术(RALPN)与后腹腔镜下肾部分切除术(RLPN)治疗早期肾癌的疗效和安全性,探讨RALPN的临床应用价值。方法选取2010年5月至2013年10月收治的70例肾癌患者,根据术式的不同分为RALPN组(n=36)和RLPN组(n=34)。比较两组手术时间、肾动脉阻断时间、术中出血量、术中输血率、术后住院时间及术后并发症发生情况。结果除RLPN组有2例术中转开放手术,两组均成功完成手术。RALPN组和RLPN组的手术时间、肾动脉阻断时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间分别为(90.5±12.6)min和(110.7±20.3)min、(15.2±5.8)min和(24.6±7.2)min、(50.2±9.5)ml和(130.2±22.4)ml、(6.1±1.7)d和(7.8±2.2)d,两组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。RALPN组和RLPN组的术中输血率分别为0和11.8%。RALPN组术后出现1例肾周血肿,RLPN组出现1例尿漏和2例继发性出血。两组在随访期间均为无瘤生存。结论 RALPN是治疗肾癌安全、有效的微创术式。 Objective To compare the efficacy and safety between the robotic-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopic partial ne-phrectomy( RALPN) and retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy( RLPN) in treating early renal carcinoma. Methods Retro-spective review of 70 renal carcinoma patients from May 2010 to October 2013 was conducted. Thirty-six patients were performed with RALPN( RALPN group) , and 34 patients underwent RLPN( RLPN group) . The operation time, renal artery clamping time, intraoper-ative blood transfusion, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay and post-operative complications between the two groups were observed and compared. Results Both the two groups were performed successfully, and 2 cases intraoperatively convered to open surgery in RLPN group. The operation time, renal artery clamping time, blood loss and postoperative hospital stay of RALPN and RLPN group were(90. 5±12. 6)min and(110. 7±20. 3)min,(15. 2±5. 8)min and(24. 6±7. 2)min,(50. 2±9. 5)ml and(130. 2±22. 4)ml, (6. 1± 1. 7)d and (7. 8±2. 2)d. There were significant differences between the two groups (P〈0. 05). The intraoperative blood transfusion between RALPN group and RLPN group were 0 and 11. 8%. In RALPN group, perirenal hematoma post-operation was found in one case, and in RLPN group, one case of urine leakage and 2 cases of secondary hemorrhage were found post-operation. All patients were of turmor-free survival. Conclusion RALPN is a quite effective, safe and minimally invasive surgical management for renal carcinoma with less post-operative complications.
出处 《临床肿瘤学杂志》 CAS 2014年第10期906-909,共4页 Chinese Clinical Oncology
基金 国家自然科学基金资助项目(81271592)
关键词 肾癌 达芬奇机器人手术系统 腹腔镜术 肾部分切除术 Renal carcinoma DaVinci surgical system Laparoscopy Partial nephrectomy
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献61

  • 1李笑弓,张士伟,刘铁石,郭宏骞,甘卫东,曾令奇.后腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗局限性肾癌(附15例报告)[J].中国微创外科杂志,2008,8(4):303-304. 被引量:14
  • 2杨斌,傅宁华,沈德娟,孟庆欣,段晓艳,刘萍.肾肿瘤的超声造影研究[J].中华超声影像学杂志,2007,16(7):599-601. 被引量:48
  • 3Jones A,Sethia K.Robotic surgery[J].Ann R Coll Surg Engl,2010,92(1):5-13.
  • 4Wilson EB.The evolution of robotic general surgery[J].Scand J Surg,2009,98(2):125-134.
  • 5Rodriguez E.Chitwood WR Robotics in cardiac surgery[J].Scand J Surg,2009,98(2):120-124.
  • 6Lee EK,Baack J,Duchene DA.Survey of practicing urologists:Robotic versus open radical prostatectomy[J].Can J Urol,2010,17(2):5094-5112.
  • 7Cho JE,Nezhat FR.Robotics and gynecologic oncology:Review of the literature[J].J Minim Invasive Gynecol,2009,16(6):669-681.
  • 8Roukos DH.The era of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer[J].Ann Surg Oncol,2010,17(1):338-347.
  • 9White MA,Haber GP,Kaouk JH.Robotic single-site surgery[J].Curr Opin Urol,2010,20(1):86-91.
  • 10Chen CC,Falcone T.Robotic gynecologic surgery:Past,present,and future[J].Clin Obstet Gynecol,2009,52(3):335-343.

共引文献86

同被引文献32

  • 1张旭,丁强.机器人技术的沿革与展望[J].微创泌尿外科杂志,2013,2(4):225-226. 被引量:20
  • 2宋华,孙颖浩,许传亮.后腹腔镜治疗肾上腺偶发瘤13例报告[J].临床泌尿外科杂志,2007,22(9):669-670. 被引量:1
  • 3Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical pms- tatectomy. BJU Int, 2001, 87(4) : 408410.
  • 4Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody JO, et al. Vattikuti Institute pros- tatectomy, a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for man- agement of localized carcinoma of the prostate : Experience of over 1100 cases. Urol Clin North Am, 2004, 31(4) : 701-717.
  • 5Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K. Robotic radical prostectomy: Out- comes of 500 cases. BJU Int, 2007, 99 (5) : 1109-1112.
  • 6Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M. A prospective comparison of radical retropubie and robot-assisted prostalectomy: Experience in one institution. BJU Int, 2003, 92(3): 205-210.
  • 7O'Malley PJ, Van Appledom S, Bouchier-Hayes DM, et al. Ro- botic radical prostatectomy in Australia: Initial experience. World J Urol, 2006, 24(2) : 165-170.
  • 8White MA, Haber GP, Kaouk JH. Robotic sing|e-site surgery Curt Opin Urol, 2010, 20( 1 ) : 86-91.
  • 9Chen CC, Falcone T. Robotic gynecologic surgery: Past, present and future. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 52 (3) : 335-345.
  • 10Rubinstein M,Gill IS,Aron M,et al.Prospective,randomized comparison of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy[J].J Urol,2005,174(2):442-445.

引证文献4

二级引证文献47

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部