Kalen Rimar, Aziz Khambati, B. Mcguire, David A. Rebuck, K. Perry, R. Nadler
{"title":"射频消融辅助无缺血机器人腹腔镜部分肾切除术:49例患者的肿瘤和功能结果","authors":"Kalen Rimar, Aziz Khambati, B. Mcguire, David A. Rebuck, K. Perry, R. Nadler","doi":"10.1155/2016/8045210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and Objectives. Robotic partial nephrectomy with peritumoral radiofrequency ablation (RFA-RPN) is a novel clampless technique. We describe oncologic and functional outcomes in a prospective cohort. Methods. From May, 2007, to December, 2009, 49 consecutive patients with renal masses <7 cm underwent RFA-RPN. During this period, only the RFA-RPN technique was utilized for all cases of partial nephrectomy. Pre- and postoperative data were analyzed and compared to 36 consecutive patients who underwent LPN. Results. In total, 49 tumors were treated in the RFA-RPN group and 36 tumors in the comparison group. Mean operative time was longer in the RFA-RPN group (370 min versus 293 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mean EBL (231 cc versus 250 cc, p = 0.42), transfusion rate (8.2% versus 11.1%, p = 0.7), or hospital stay (3.9 versus 4.4 days, p = 0.2). Two patients in the RFA-RPN (4.1%) and 1 (2.7%) patient in the comparison group had a positive surgical margin (p = 0.75). 17 (34.7%) patients had a postoperative urine leak in the RFA-RPN group versus 2 (5.6%) patients in the comparison group (p = 0.001). Mean follow-up was 54 months versus 68.4 months in the comparison group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding change in GFR (p = 0.67). There were 3 recurrences (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group and 0 recurrences in the RPN group (p = 0.23). There were 3 deaths (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group (one cancer specific) and 4 deaths (11.1%) in the RPN group (non-cancer specific) over the follow-up period (p = 0.44). Conclusions. Our data suggests that this technique is associated with a similar degree of renal preservation but higher rates of postoperative urine leak and possibly higher rates of recurrence.","PeriodicalId":7490,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Urology","volume":"2016 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/8045210","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiofrequency Ablation-Assisted Zero-Ischemia Robotic Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Oncologic and Functional Outcomes in 49 Patients\",\"authors\":\"Kalen Rimar, Aziz Khambati, B. Mcguire, David A. Rebuck, K. Perry, R. Nadler\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2016/8045210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction and Objectives. Robotic partial nephrectomy with peritumoral radiofrequency ablation (RFA-RPN) is a novel clampless technique. We describe oncologic and functional outcomes in a prospective cohort. Methods. From May, 2007, to December, 2009, 49 consecutive patients with renal masses <7 cm underwent RFA-RPN. During this period, only the RFA-RPN technique was utilized for all cases of partial nephrectomy. Pre- and postoperative data were analyzed and compared to 36 consecutive patients who underwent LPN. Results. In total, 49 tumors were treated in the RFA-RPN group and 36 tumors in the comparison group. Mean operative time was longer in the RFA-RPN group (370 min versus 293 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mean EBL (231 cc versus 250 cc, p = 0.42), transfusion rate (8.2% versus 11.1%, p = 0.7), or hospital stay (3.9 versus 4.4 days, p = 0.2). Two patients in the RFA-RPN (4.1%) and 1 (2.7%) patient in the comparison group had a positive surgical margin (p = 0.75). 17 (34.7%) patients had a postoperative urine leak in the RFA-RPN group versus 2 (5.6%) patients in the comparison group (p = 0.001). Mean follow-up was 54 months versus 68.4 months in the comparison group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding change in GFR (p = 0.67). There were 3 recurrences (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group and 0 recurrences in the RPN group (p = 0.23). There were 3 deaths (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group (one cancer specific) and 4 deaths (11.1%) in the RPN group (non-cancer specific) over the follow-up period (p = 0.44). Conclusions. Our data suggests that this technique is associated with a similar degree of renal preservation but higher rates of postoperative urine leak and possibly higher rates of recurrence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Urology\",\"volume\":\"2016 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/8045210\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8045210\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8045210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
引言和目标。机器人部分肾切除术与肿瘤周围射频消融(RFA-RPN)是一种新型的无钳技术。我们在前瞻性队列中描述肿瘤和功能结果。方法。2007年5月至2009年12月,连续49例肾肿块<7 cm患者行RFA-RPN。在此期间,只有RFA-RPN技术被用于所有的部分肾切除术。对36例连续行LPN患者的术前和术后数据进行分析和比较。结果。RFA-RPN组共治疗肿瘤49例,对照组36例。RFA-RPN组平均手术时间更长(370 min vs 293 min, p < 0.001)。在平均EBL (231 cc对250 cc, p = 0.42)、输血率(8.2%对11.1%,p = 0.7)或住院时间(3.9天对4.4天,p = 0.2)方面均无显著差异。RFA-RPN组2例(4.1%),对照组1例(2.7%)手术切缘阳性(p = 0.75)。RFA-RPN组术后尿漏17例(34.7%),对照组2例(5.6%)(p = 0.001)。平均随访54个月,对照组为68.4个月。两组间GFR变化无显著性差异(p = 0.67)。RFA-RPN组复发3例(6.1%),RPN组复发0例(p = 0.23)。随访期间,RFA-RPN组(1例癌症特异性)有3例死亡(6.1%),RPN组(非癌症特异性)有4例死亡(11.1%)(p = 0.44)。结论。我们的数据表明,该技术与类似程度的肾脏保存有关,但术后尿漏率较高,可能复发率也较高。
Radiofrequency Ablation-Assisted Zero-Ischemia Robotic Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Oncologic and Functional Outcomes in 49 Patients
Introduction and Objectives. Robotic partial nephrectomy with peritumoral radiofrequency ablation (RFA-RPN) is a novel clampless technique. We describe oncologic and functional outcomes in a prospective cohort. Methods. From May, 2007, to December, 2009, 49 consecutive patients with renal masses <7 cm underwent RFA-RPN. During this period, only the RFA-RPN technique was utilized for all cases of partial nephrectomy. Pre- and postoperative data were analyzed and compared to 36 consecutive patients who underwent LPN. Results. In total, 49 tumors were treated in the RFA-RPN group and 36 tumors in the comparison group. Mean operative time was longer in the RFA-RPN group (370 min versus 293 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mean EBL (231 cc versus 250 cc, p = 0.42), transfusion rate (8.2% versus 11.1%, p = 0.7), or hospital stay (3.9 versus 4.4 days, p = 0.2). Two patients in the RFA-RPN (4.1%) and 1 (2.7%) patient in the comparison group had a positive surgical margin (p = 0.75). 17 (34.7%) patients had a postoperative urine leak in the RFA-RPN group versus 2 (5.6%) patients in the comparison group (p = 0.001). Mean follow-up was 54 months versus 68.4 months in the comparison group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding change in GFR (p = 0.67). There were 3 recurrences (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group and 0 recurrences in the RPN group (p = 0.23). There were 3 deaths (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group (one cancer specific) and 4 deaths (11.1%) in the RPN group (non-cancer specific) over the follow-up period (p = 0.44). Conclusions. Our data suggests that this technique is associated with a similar degree of renal preservation but higher rates of postoperative urine leak and possibly higher rates of recurrence.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Urology is a peer-reviewed, open access journal that publishes state-of-the-art reviews and original research papers of wide interest in all fields of urology. The journal strives to provide publication of important manuscripts to the widest possible audience worldwide, without the constraints of expensive, hard-to-access, traditional bound journals. Advances in Urology is designed to improve publication access of both well-established urologic scientists and less well-established writers, by allowing interested scientists worldwide to participate fully.