Meiman Tao, Kang Cheng, Wei Xu, Zhounan Qian, Peng Pan
{"title":"Comparison of the effects of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.","authors":"Meiman Tao, Kang Cheng, Wei Xu, Zhounan Qian, Peng Pan","doi":"10.12669/pjms.40.10.10613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effects of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches for robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study on RAPN at Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University. Between September 2020 and February 2024, the included patients underwent either transperitoneal approach or retroperitoneal approach. Perioperative status, stress response, quality of life, and incidence of complications were compared between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 105 patients were included in this analysis, with 54 patients in the Retroperitoneal group, and 51 patients in the Transperitoneal group. The retroperitoneal approach was associated with significantly better perioperative indicators compared to the transperitoneal method (<i>P</i><0.05). After the surgery, serum levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count (WBC), and cortisol (Cor) in the Retroperitoneal group were lower than in the Transperitoneal group (<i>P</i><0.05). The quality-of-life scores of patients in the Retroperitoneal group were higher (<i>P</i><0.05), but no statistically significant difference in the incidence of complications between the groups (<i>P</i>>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with the transperitoneal approach, the retroperitoneal method of RAPN is equally safe and is associated with improved perioperative status, lower stress response, and better quality of life for RCC patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":19958,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"40 10","pages":"2202-2207"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568722/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.40.10.10613","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effects of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches for robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on RAPN at Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University. Between September 2020 and February 2024, the included patients underwent either transperitoneal approach or retroperitoneal approach. Perioperative status, stress response, quality of life, and incidence of complications were compared between the groups.
Results: A total of 105 patients were included in this analysis, with 54 patients in the Retroperitoneal group, and 51 patients in the Transperitoneal group. The retroperitoneal approach was associated with significantly better perioperative indicators compared to the transperitoneal method (P<0.05). After the surgery, serum levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count (WBC), and cortisol (Cor) in the Retroperitoneal group were lower than in the Transperitoneal group (P<0.05). The quality-of-life scores of patients in the Retroperitoneal group were higher (P<0.05), but no statistically significant difference in the incidence of complications between the groups (P>0.05).
Conclusions: Compared with the transperitoneal approach, the retroperitoneal method of RAPN is equally safe and is associated with improved perioperative status, lower stress response, and better quality of life for RCC patients.
期刊介绍：
It is a peer reviewed medical journal published regularly since 1984. It was previously known as quarterly "SPECIALIST" till December 31st 1999. It publishes original research articles, review articles, current practices, short communications & case reports. It attracts manuscripts not only from within Pakistan but also from over fifty countries from abroad.
Copies of PJMS are sent to all the import medical libraries all over Pakistan and overseas particularly in South East Asia and Asia Pacific besides WHO EMRO Region countries. Eminent members of the medical profession at home and abroad regularly contribute their write-ups, manuscripts in our publications. We pursue an independent editorial policy, which allows an opportunity to the healthcare professionals to express their views without any fear or favour. That is why many opinion makers among the medical and pharmaceutical profession use this publication to communicate their viewpoint.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
