开腹腹膜外与腹腔镜根治性前列腺囊肿切除术的围手术期疗效:单中心比较研究

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Urology Journal Pub Date : 2024-05-06 DOI:10.22037/uj.v21i03.7937
Cengiz Çanakcı, Orkunt Özkaptan, Erdinç Dinçer, Osman Murat Ipek, Gürkan Dalgıç, Ahmet Sahan
{"title":"开腹腹膜外与腹腔镜根治性前列腺囊肿切除术的围手术期疗效:单中心比较研究","authors":"Cengiz Çanakcı, Orkunt Özkaptan, Erdinç Dinçer, Osman Murat Ipek, Gürkan Dalgıç, Ahmet Sahan","doi":"10.22037/uj.v21i03.7937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare 90-day  perioperative complications and pathological outcomes between laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and extraperitoneal radical cystectomy (EORC) approaches.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>All operations were performed in a single high-volume tertiary referee center by the same surgical team.Males ≥ 18 years with pre-cystectomy clinical T1-T3 disease and having undergone an ileal conduit were included. Exclusion criteria included patients with inflammatory bowel disease, previous pelvic and/or abdominal irradiation, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and/or clinical T4 disease. Perioperative outcomes such as operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay, and 90-day complications were evaluated. The recovery duration of regular bowel activity, mean stool passage,and ileus rates were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 221 patients met the inclusion criteria(81 LRC and 130 EORC). Demographics and preoperative parameters were comparable. Intraoperative estimated blood lossfavored LRC by a median of 450 mL (200-900) P=.021) vs. a median of 700 mL (300-2900) for EORC. The transfusion rate did not differ between the two groups; %14.8 (N=12) for the LRC and %20.8 (N=27) for EORC (P=.37). The median hospital stay was 9 (4-49) days for EORC and 8 (4-29) days for LRC (P=.011). The need for analgesics to control pain through an epidural catheter was higher for EORC (P=.042). There was no difference in overall complication rates (P=.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>  Although LRC appears to have a slight advantage over EORC, both techniques yield satisfactory results in regard to ileus rates and 90-day perioperative complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":23416,"journal":{"name":"Urology Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perioperative Outcomes of Open Extra-peritoneal Versus Laparoscopic Radical Cystoprostatectomy: A single Center Comparative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Cengiz Çanakcı, Orkunt Özkaptan, Erdinç Dinçer, Osman Murat Ipek, Gürkan Dalgıç, Ahmet Sahan\",\"doi\":\"10.22037/uj.v21i03.7937\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare 90-day  perioperative complications and pathological outcomes between laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and extraperitoneal radical cystectomy (EORC) approaches.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>All operations were performed in a single high-volume tertiary referee center by the same surgical team.Males ≥ 18 years with pre-cystectomy clinical T1-T3 disease and having undergone an ileal conduit were included. Exclusion criteria included patients with inflammatory bowel disease, previous pelvic and/or abdominal irradiation, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and/or clinical T4 disease. Perioperative outcomes such as operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay, and 90-day complications were evaluated. The recovery duration of regular bowel activity, mean stool passage,and ileus rates were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 221 patients met the inclusion criteria(81 LRC and 130 EORC). Demographics and preoperative parameters were comparable. Intraoperative estimated blood lossfavored LRC by a median of 450 mL (200-900) P=.021) vs. a median of 700 mL (300-2900) for EORC. The transfusion rate did not differ between the two groups; %14.8 (N=12) for the LRC and %20.8 (N=27) for EORC (P=.37). The median hospital stay was 9 (4-49) days for EORC and 8 (4-29) days for LRC (P=.011). The need for analgesics to control pain through an epidural catheter was higher for EORC (P=.042). There was no difference in overall complication rates (P=.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>  Although LRC appears to have a slight advantage over EORC, both techniques yield satisfactory results in regard to ileus rates and 90-day perioperative complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urology Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v21i03.7937\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v21i03.7937","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术(LRC)和腹膜外根治性膀胱切除术(EORC)两种方法的90天围手术期并发症和病理结果:所有手术均由同一外科团队在一家高容量三级裁判中心进行。年龄≥18岁的男性患者均在切除术前患有临床T1-T3疾病,并接受过回肠导管手术。排除标准包括患有炎症性肠病、曾接受盆腔和/或腹部照射、新辅助化疗和/或临床T4疾病的患者。对手术时间、估计失血量、输血率、住院时间和 90 天并发症等围术期结果进行了评估。此外,还记录了正常排便活动的恢复时间、平均粪便通过率和回肠率:共有 221 例患者符合纳入标准(81 例 LRC 和 130 例 EORC)。人口统计学和术前参数具有可比性。术中估计失血量中位数为 450 毫升(200-900),LRC 更优,而 EORC 中位数为 700 毫升(300-2900)。两组的输血率没有差异:LRC 为 14.8%(12 例),EORC 为 20.8%(27 例)(P=.37)。EORC 的中位住院时间为 9(4-49)天,LRC 为 8(4-29)天(P=0.011)。EORC患者通过硬膜外导管止痛的需求更高(P=.042)。总体并发症发生率没有差异(P=.47):虽然 LRC 似乎比 EORC 略胜一筹,但在回肠率和 90 天围手术期并发症方面,两种技术都取得了令人满意的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Perioperative Outcomes of Open Extra-peritoneal Versus Laparoscopic Radical Cystoprostatectomy: A single Center Comparative Study.

Purpose: To compare 90-day  perioperative complications and pathological outcomes between laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and extraperitoneal radical cystectomy (EORC) approaches.

Materials and methods: All operations were performed in a single high-volume tertiary referee center by the same surgical team.Males ≥ 18 years with pre-cystectomy clinical T1-T3 disease and having undergone an ileal conduit were included. Exclusion criteria included patients with inflammatory bowel disease, previous pelvic and/or abdominal irradiation, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and/or clinical T4 disease. Perioperative outcomes such as operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, hospital stay, and 90-day complications were evaluated. The recovery duration of regular bowel activity, mean stool passage,and ileus rates were recorded.

Results: A total of 221 patients met the inclusion criteria(81 LRC and 130 EORC). Demographics and preoperative parameters were comparable. Intraoperative estimated blood lossfavored LRC by a median of 450 mL (200-900) P=.021) vs. a median of 700 mL (300-2900) for EORC. The transfusion rate did not differ between the two groups; %14.8 (N=12) for the LRC and %20.8 (N=27) for EORC (P=.37). The median hospital stay was 9 (4-49) days for EORC and 8 (4-29) days for LRC (P=.011). The need for analgesics to control pain through an epidural catheter was higher for EORC (P=.042). There was no difference in overall complication rates (P=.47).

Conclusion:   Although LRC appears to have a slight advantage over EORC, both techniques yield satisfactory results in regard to ileus rates and 90-day perioperative complications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Urology Journal
Urology Journal UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
44
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As the official journal of the Urology and Nephrology Research Center (UNRC) and the Iranian Urological Association (IUA), Urology Journal is a comprehensive digest of useful information on modern urology. Emphasis is on practical information that reflects the latest diagnostic and treatment techniques. Our objectives are to provide an exceptional source of current and clinically relevant research in the discipline of urology, to reflect the scientific work and progress of our colleagues, and to present the articles in a logical, timely, and concise format that meets the diverse needs of today’s urologist. Urology Journal publishes manuscripts on urology and kidney transplantation, all of which undergo extensive peer review by recognized authorities in the field prior to their acceptance for publication. Accordingly, original articles, case reports, and letters to editor are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and Complications of Mitrofanoff Continent Urinary Diversion in Adults with Complex Urethral Strictures: A Single-Center Experience. Investigating the Prevalence of Autonomic Neuropathy in Diabetic Patients with Urinary Irritation Symptoms Without a Known Cause. Translation and Validation of the Persian Version of the Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life Questionnaire. Can Radiological Imaging Accurately Predict the Length of the Ureteral Defect/Stricture Following Ureteral Injury? Differentially Expressed Blood ARLNC1 in Combination with PCA3/PSA have Reassuring Clinical Applications in the Early Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Iranians: A pilot study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1