机器人辅助肾部分切除术中的单层肾切除术与双层肾切除术:对围手术期结果、并发症和功能性结果的影响。

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Minerva Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05700-8
Riccardo Bertolo, Francesco Ditonno, Alessandro Veccia, Vincenzo DE Marco, Filippo Migliorini, Antonio B Porcaro, Riccardo Rizzetto, Maria A Cerruto, Riccardo Autorino, Alessandro Antonelli
{"title":"机器人辅助肾部分切除术中的单层肾切除术与双层肾切除术:对围手术期结果、并发症和功能性结果的影响。","authors":"Riccardo Bertolo, Francesco Ditonno, Alessandro Veccia, Vincenzo DE Marco, Filippo Migliorini, Antonio B Porcaro, Riccardo Rizzetto, Maria A Cerruto, Riccardo Autorino, Alessandro Antonelli","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05700-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The debate between single-layer and double-layer renorrhaphy techniques during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) represents a subject of ongoing discourse. The present analysis aims to compare the perioperative and functional outcomes of single- versus double-layer renorrhaphy during RPN.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Study data were retrieved from prospectively maintained institutional database (Jan2018-May2023). Study population was divided into two groups according to the number of layers (single vs. double) used for renorrhaphy. Baseline and perioperative data were compared. Postoperative surgical outcomes included type and grade of complications as classified according to Clavien-Dindo. Serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate were used to measure renal function.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred seventeen patients were included in the analysis: 209 received single-layer closure, while 108 underwent double-layer renorrhaphy. Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the groups. Comparable low incidence of intraoperative complications was observed between the cohorts (P=0.5). No difference was found in terms of mean (95% CI) Hb level drop postoperation (single-layer: 1.6 g/dL [1.5-1.7] vs. double-layer: 1.4 g/dL [1.2-1.5], P=0.3). Overall and \"major\" rate of complications were 16% and 3%, respectively, with no difference observed in terms of any grade (P=0.2) and major complications (P=0.7). Postoperative renal function was not statistically different between the treatment modalities. At logistic regression analyses, no difference in terms of probability of overall (OR 0.82 [0.63-1.88]) and major (OR 0.94 [0.77-6.44]) complications for the number of suture layers was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Single-layer and double-layer renorrhaphy demonstrated comparable perioperative and functional outcomes within the setting of the present study.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":"76 2","pages":"176-184"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single-layer versus double-layer renorrhaphy technique during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: impact on perioperative outcomes, complications, and functional outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Riccardo Bertolo, Francesco Ditonno, Alessandro Veccia, Vincenzo DE Marco, Filippo Migliorini, Antonio B Porcaro, Riccardo Rizzetto, Maria A Cerruto, Riccardo Autorino, Alessandro Antonelli\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05700-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The debate between single-layer and double-layer renorrhaphy techniques during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) represents a subject of ongoing discourse. The present analysis aims to compare the perioperative and functional outcomes of single- versus double-layer renorrhaphy during RPN.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Study data were retrieved from prospectively maintained institutional database (Jan2018-May2023). Study population was divided into two groups according to the number of layers (single vs. double) used for renorrhaphy. Baseline and perioperative data were compared. Postoperative surgical outcomes included type and grade of complications as classified according to Clavien-Dindo. Serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate were used to measure renal function.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred seventeen patients were included in the analysis: 209 received single-layer closure, while 108 underwent double-layer renorrhaphy. Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the groups. Comparable low incidence of intraoperative complications was observed between the cohorts (P=0.5). No difference was found in terms of mean (95% CI) Hb level drop postoperation (single-layer: 1.6 g/dL [1.5-1.7] vs. double-layer: 1.4 g/dL [1.2-1.5], P=0.3). Overall and \\\"major\\\" rate of complications were 16% and 3%, respectively, with no difference observed in terms of any grade (P=0.2) and major complications (P=0.7). Postoperative renal function was not statistically different between the treatment modalities. At logistic regression analyses, no difference in terms of probability of overall (OR 0.82 [0.63-1.88]) and major (OR 0.94 [0.77-6.44]) complications for the number of suture layers was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Single-layer and double-layer renorrhaphy demonstrated comparable perioperative and functional outcomes within the setting of the present study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\"76 2\",\"pages\":\"176-184\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva Urology and Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05700-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05700-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RPN)中单层肾切除术和双层肾切除术之间的争论是一个持续的话题。本分析旨在比较机器人辅助肾部分切除术中单层肾切除术与双层肾切除术的围手术期和功能结果:研究数据取自前瞻性维护的机构数据库(2018 年 1 月至 2023 年 5 月)。根据肾盂成形术的层数(单层与双层)将研究对象分为两组。比较了基线和围手术期数据。术后手术结果包括根据 Clavien-Dindo 分类的并发症类型和等级。血清肌酐和估计肾小球滤过率用于测量肾功能:共有 317 名患者参与分析:其中 209 人接受了单层肾盂闭合术,108 人接受了双层肾盂成形术。两组患者的基线特征无统计学差异。两组患者的术中并发症发生率相当低(P=0.5)。在术后平均(95% CI)血红蛋白水平下降方面没有发现差异(单层:1.6 g/dL [1.6 g/dL] ;双层:1.6 g/dL [1.6 g/dL] ):单层:1.6 g/dL [1.5-1.7] vs. 双层:1.4 g/dL [1.5-1.7] :1.4 g/dL [1.2-1.5],P=0.3)。总并发症发生率和 "主要 "并发症发生率分别为16%和3%,在任何级别并发症(P=0.2)和主要并发症(P=0.7)方面未观察到差异。两种治疗方法的术后肾功能无统计学差异。在逻辑回归分析中,未观察到缝合层数对总体(OR 0.82 [0.63-1.88] )和主要(OR 0.94 [0.77-6.44])并发症发生概率的影响:结论:在本研究中,单层和双层肾造瘘术的围手术期和功能效果相当。
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
Single-layer versus double-layer renorrhaphy technique during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: impact on perioperative outcomes, complications, and functional outcomes.

Background: The debate between single-layer and double-layer renorrhaphy techniques during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) represents a subject of ongoing discourse. The present analysis aims to compare the perioperative and functional outcomes of single- versus double-layer renorrhaphy during RPN.

Methods: Study data were retrieved from prospectively maintained institutional database (Jan2018-May2023). Study population was divided into two groups according to the number of layers (single vs. double) used for renorrhaphy. Baseline and perioperative data were compared. Postoperative surgical outcomes included type and grade of complications as classified according to Clavien-Dindo. Serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate were used to measure renal function.

Results: Three hundred seventeen patients were included in the analysis: 209 received single-layer closure, while 108 underwent double-layer renorrhaphy. Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the groups. Comparable low incidence of intraoperative complications was observed between the cohorts (P=0.5). No difference was found in terms of mean (95% CI) Hb level drop postoperation (single-layer: 1.6 g/dL [1.5-1.7] vs. double-layer: 1.4 g/dL [1.2-1.5], P=0.3). Overall and "major" rate of complications were 16% and 3%, respectively, with no difference observed in terms of any grade (P=0.2) and major complications (P=0.7). Postoperative renal function was not statistically different between the treatment modalities. At logistic regression analyses, no difference in terms of probability of overall (OR 0.82 [0.63-1.88]) and major (OR 0.94 [0.77-6.44]) complications for the number of suture layers was observed.

Conclusions: Single-layer and double-layer renorrhaphy demonstrated comparable perioperative and functional outcomes within the setting of the present study.

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
Minerva Urology and Nephrology
Minerva Urology and Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
32.70%
发文量
237
期刊最新文献
Modified robot-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for adult patients with horseshoe kidney: techniques and medium-term outcomes. Partial penectomy with reconstruction using a split-thickness skin graft: a multicenter experience. Robot-assisted retroperitoneoscopic kidney surgery with Versius®. The association between MET c.3328G>A p.Val1110Ile mutation and renal cell carcinomas in a specific population: data on histology, focality, onset and the need for surgery from a monocentric study. Augmentation cystoplasty in children with neuropathic bladder: long-term outcomes after 30 years experience.
×
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