开放式、腹腔镜或机器人部分肾切除术的三合一结果:手术入路重要吗?

IF 1.9 Q3 ONCOLOGY Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL Pub Date : 2019-05-13 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.15586/jkcvhl.2019.115
Ketan Mehra, Ramanitharan Manikandan, Lalgudi Narayanan Dorairajan, Sreenivasan Sreerag, Amit Jain, Sri Harsha Bokka
{"title":"开放式、腹腔镜或机器人部分肾切除术的三合一结果:手术入路重要吗?","authors":"Ketan Mehra,&nbsp;Ramanitharan Manikandan,&nbsp;Lalgudi Narayanan Dorairajan,&nbsp;Sreenivasan Sreerag,&nbsp;Amit Jain,&nbsp;Sri Harsha Bokka","doi":"10.15586/jkcvhl.2019.115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This retrospective study evaluated perioperative outcomes of open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and identified predictive factors of Trifecta achievement for renal tumors that underwent partial nephrectomy (PN) in a single institutional cohort. The study involved patients who underwent PN from January 2011 to July 2018. Trifecta was defined as absence of perioperative complications, no positive surgical margins, and ischemia time <30 min. Fifty-five PN procedures were reviewed: 28 OPN, 14 LPN, and 13 RAPN. OPN, LPN and RAPN had similar median tumor size (5.75, 5.25, and 5 cm), nephrometry score (7, 6, and 6), and preoperative creatinine (1.09, 1.1, and 1.1 mg/dl, respectively). Blood loss was higher for OPN (550 ml) than for LPN (400 ml) and RAPN (300 ml), P = 0.042. Drain was removed after 6 days in OPN which was higher than LPN and RAPN (4.5 and 4 days, respectively), P = 0.008. OPN, LPN, and RAPN had similar median operative time (190, 180, and 180 min, respectively), P = 0.438. Median postoperative stay for OPN, LPN, and RAPN was 5, 6.5, and 10 days, respectively. Trifecta outcomes of 73.1%, 64.3%, and 61.53% were achieved in OPN, LPN, and RAPN, respectively, P = 0.730. It was concluded that Trifecta outcomes had no significant difference among OPN, LPN, and RAPN. LPN can produce as good results as RAPN. Keeping in mind the cost-effectiveness, LPN holds an important position in developing countries where expenditure by patient is a major factor.</p>","PeriodicalId":44291,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL","volume":"6 1","pages":"8-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6532825/pdf/","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trifecta Outcomes in Open, Laparoscopy or Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Does the Surgical Approach Matter?\",\"authors\":\"Ketan Mehra,&nbsp;Ramanitharan Manikandan,&nbsp;Lalgudi Narayanan Dorairajan,&nbsp;Sreenivasan Sreerag,&nbsp;Amit Jain,&nbsp;Sri Harsha Bokka\",\"doi\":\"10.15586/jkcvhl.2019.115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This retrospective study evaluated perioperative outcomes of open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and identified predictive factors of Trifecta achievement for renal tumors that underwent partial nephrectomy (PN) in a single institutional cohort. The study involved patients who underwent PN from January 2011 to July 2018. Trifecta was defined as absence of perioperative complications, no positive surgical margins, and ischemia time <30 min. Fifty-five PN procedures were reviewed: 28 OPN, 14 LPN, and 13 RAPN. OPN, LPN and RAPN had similar median tumor size (5.75, 5.25, and 5 cm), nephrometry score (7, 6, and 6), and preoperative creatinine (1.09, 1.1, and 1.1 mg/dl, respectively). Blood loss was higher for OPN (550 ml) than for LPN (400 ml) and RAPN (300 ml), P = 0.042. Drain was removed after 6 days in OPN which was higher than LPN and RAPN (4.5 and 4 days, respectively), P = 0.008. OPN, LPN, and RAPN had similar median operative time (190, 180, and 180 min, respectively), P = 0.438. Median postoperative stay for OPN, LPN, and RAPN was 5, 6.5, and 10 days, respectively. Trifecta outcomes of 73.1%, 64.3%, and 61.53% were achieved in OPN, LPN, and RAPN, respectively, P = 0.730. It was concluded that Trifecta outcomes had no significant difference among OPN, LPN, and RAPN. LPN can produce as good results as RAPN. Keeping in mind the cost-effectiveness, LPN holds an important position in developing countries where expenditure by patient is a major factor.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"8-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6532825/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15586/jkcvhl.2019.115\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15586/jkcvhl.2019.115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

本回顾性研究评估了开放式部分肾切除术(OPN)、腹腔镜部分肾切除术(LPN)和机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RAPN)的围手术期预后,并在单一机构队列中确定了三联甲治疗肾肿瘤部分肾切除术(PN)的预测因素。该研究涉及2011年1月至2018年7月期间接受PN治疗的患者。triecta的定义是无围手术期并发症,无阳性手术切缘,缺血时间短
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
Trifecta Outcomes in Open, Laparoscopy or Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Does the Surgical Approach Matter?

This retrospective study evaluated perioperative outcomes of open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and identified predictive factors of Trifecta achievement for renal tumors that underwent partial nephrectomy (PN) in a single institutional cohort. The study involved patients who underwent PN from January 2011 to July 2018. Trifecta was defined as absence of perioperative complications, no positive surgical margins, and ischemia time <30 min. Fifty-five PN procedures were reviewed: 28 OPN, 14 LPN, and 13 RAPN. OPN, LPN and RAPN had similar median tumor size (5.75, 5.25, and 5 cm), nephrometry score (7, 6, and 6), and preoperative creatinine (1.09, 1.1, and 1.1 mg/dl, respectively). Blood loss was higher for OPN (550 ml) than for LPN (400 ml) and RAPN (300 ml), P = 0.042. Drain was removed after 6 days in OPN which was higher than LPN and RAPN (4.5 and 4 days, respectively), P = 0.008. OPN, LPN, and RAPN had similar median operative time (190, 180, and 180 min, respectively), P = 0.438. Median postoperative stay for OPN, LPN, and RAPN was 5, 6.5, and 10 days, respectively. Trifecta outcomes of 73.1%, 64.3%, and 61.53% were achieved in OPN, LPN, and RAPN, respectively, P = 0.730. It was concluded that Trifecta outcomes had no significant difference among OPN, LPN, and RAPN. LPN can produce as good results as RAPN. Keeping in mind the cost-effectiveness, LPN holds an important position in developing countries where expenditure by patient is a major factor.

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
自引率
6.20%
发文量
22
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊最新文献
Avoidable Benign Kidney Tumor Resections-Data from a Tertiary Care Cancer Institute. Primary Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumor of Kidney: An Uncommon Renal Neoplasm. Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma with Sarcomatoid Differentiation (osteosarcomatous and chondrosarcomatous differentiation)-A Case Report and Comprehensive Review. An Uncommon Case of Sinonasal Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma Metastatic to the Kidney Treated with Metastasectomy. Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Patients Ineligible for Front-line Clinical Trials.
×
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