腹腔镜活体供肾切除术:三种不同技术的单中心比较。

Christopher Carnabatu, Danielle Tatum, Anil Paramesh, Hoonbae Jeon, Mary Killackey, Adarsh Vijay
{"title":"腹腔镜活体供肾切除术:三种不同技术的单中心比较。","authors":"Christopher Carnabatu,&nbsp;Danielle Tatum,&nbsp;Anil Paramesh,&nbsp;Hoonbae Jeon,&nbsp;Mary Killackey,&nbsp;Adarsh Vijay","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2022.00088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>In this study, we compare three different surgical approaches at a single institution. Pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with Pfannenstiel incision (PLDN) was compared with hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via midline hand port (HALDNM) and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via left iliac hand port (HALDNL).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included all laparoscopic left donor nephrectomies performed at our institution between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Donor characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, number of renal arteries, duration of surgical procedure, warm ischemia time (WIT), and length of hospital stay were compared. Cosmetic scores were calculated by totaling the length of all incisions placed. Postoperative complications within 90 days were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period 71 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed of which 26 were HALDNM, 24 were HALDNL, and 21 were PLDN. Donor characteristics were similar in all three groups. Total operative time was significantly lower in HALDNM (181 minutes) than PLDN (233 minutes) and HALDNL (242 minutes) (p < 0.001). The WIT was comparable in all three groups: HALDNL (7.2 minutes), PLDN (4.1 minutes), and HALDM (4.9 minutes) (p = 0.913). Median cosmetic score was significantly better in the PLDN group (8.2 cm) when compared to HALDNM (11.1 cm) and HALDNL (9.9 cm) (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show that all three technical modifications of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are safe and feasible with good postoperative outcomes. HALDNM has the added benefit of decreased operative time while PLDN has a cosmetic advantage.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ac/75/e2022.00088.PMC10009877.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Single Center Comparison of Three Different Techniques.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Carnabatu,&nbsp;Danielle Tatum,&nbsp;Anil Paramesh,&nbsp;Hoonbae Jeon,&nbsp;Mary Killackey,&nbsp;Adarsh Vijay\",\"doi\":\"10.4293/JSLS.2022.00088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>In this study, we compare three different surgical approaches at a single institution. Pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with Pfannenstiel incision (PLDN) was compared with hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via midline hand port (HALDNM) and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via left iliac hand port (HALDNL).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included all laparoscopic left donor nephrectomies performed at our institution between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Donor characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, number of renal arteries, duration of surgical procedure, warm ischemia time (WIT), and length of hospital stay were compared. Cosmetic scores were calculated by totaling the length of all incisions placed. Postoperative complications within 90 days were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period 71 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed of which 26 were HALDNM, 24 were HALDNL, and 21 were PLDN. Donor characteristics were similar in all three groups. Total operative time was significantly lower in HALDNM (181 minutes) than PLDN (233 minutes) and HALDNL (242 minutes) (p < 0.001). The WIT was comparable in all three groups: HALDNL (7.2 minutes), PLDN (4.1 minutes), and HALDM (4.9 minutes) (p = 0.913). Median cosmetic score was significantly better in the PLDN group (8.2 cm) when compared to HALDNM (11.1 cm) and HALDNL (9.9 cm) (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show that all three technical modifications of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are safe and feasible with good postoperative outcomes. HALDNM has the added benefit of decreased operative time while PLDN has a cosmetic advantage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ac/75/e2022.00088.PMC10009877.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00088\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2022.00088","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景和目的:在本研究中,我们比较了同一机构的三种不同的手术入路。采用Pfannenstiel切口(PLDN)进行纯腹腔镜供肾切除术,与经中线手口行腹腔镜供肾切除术(HALDNM)和经左髂手口行腹腔镜供肾切除术(HALDNL)进行比较。方法:本研究包括2020年1月1日至2021年12月31日在我院进行的所有腹腔镜左供肾切除术。供体特征包括年龄、性别、体重指数、肾动脉数目、手术时间、热缺血时间(WIT)和住院时间。美容评分通过所有切口长度的总和来计算。比较术后90天内的并发症。结果:本研究期间共施行71例腹腔镜供肾切除术,其中HALDNM 26例,HALDNL 24例,PLDN 21例。三组供体特征相似。HALDNM组的总手术时间(181分钟)明显低于PLDN组(233分钟)和HALDNL组(242分钟)(p < 0.001)。所有三组的WIT具有可比性:HALDNL(7.2分钟),PLDN(4.1分钟)和HALDM(4.9分钟)(p = 0.913)。与HALDNM (11.1 cm)和HALDNL (9.9 cm)相比,PLDN组的中位美容评分(8.2 cm)明显更好(p < 0.001)。结论:腹腔镜供肾切除术的三种技术改良均安全可行,术后效果良好。HALDNM具有减少手术时间的额外好处,而PLDN具有美观的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Single Center Comparison of Three Different Techniques.

Background and objectives: In this study, we compare three different surgical approaches at a single institution. Pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with Pfannenstiel incision (PLDN) was compared with hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via midline hand port (HALDNM) and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via left iliac hand port (HALDNL).

Methods: This study included all laparoscopic left donor nephrectomies performed at our institution between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Donor characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, number of renal arteries, duration of surgical procedure, warm ischemia time (WIT), and length of hospital stay were compared. Cosmetic scores were calculated by totaling the length of all incisions placed. Postoperative complications within 90 days were compared.

Results: During the study period 71 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed of which 26 were HALDNM, 24 were HALDNL, and 21 were PLDN. Donor characteristics were similar in all three groups. Total operative time was significantly lower in HALDNM (181 minutes) than PLDN (233 minutes) and HALDNL (242 minutes) (p < 0.001). The WIT was comparable in all three groups: HALDNL (7.2 minutes), PLDN (4.1 minutes), and HALDM (4.9 minutes) (p = 0.913). Median cosmetic score was significantly better in the PLDN group (8.2 cm) when compared to HALDNM (11.1 cm) and HALDNL (9.9 cm) (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Our results show that all three technical modifications of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are safe and feasible with good postoperative outcomes. HALDNM has the added benefit of decreased operative time while PLDN has a cosmetic advantage.

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
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
期刊最新文献
Hysterectomy for Large Uterus by Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS). Surgeons' Approach to Intraoperative Complications in Total Extraperitoneal (TEP) Hernia Repair. Inferior-Medial Approach to Laparoscopic Splenic Vessel-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy. Comparative Analysis of Hemostasis and Staple-Line Integrity between Medtronic Tri-StapleTM with Preloaded Buttress Material and the AEONTM Stapler in Bariatric Surgery. Current Status and Role of Artificial Intelligence in Anorectal Diseases and Pelvic Floor Disorders.
×
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