Literature DB >> 10799156

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: the Cleveland clinic experience.

I S Gill1, D Schweizer, M G Hobart, G T Sung, E A Klein, A C Novick.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is usually performed by the transperitoneal approach. At our institution the retroperitoneoscopic approach is preferred. We confirm the technical feasibility of retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy, even for large specimens, and compare its results with open surgery in a contemporary cohort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 patients underwent 53 retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomies. Data from the most recent 34 laparoscopic cases were retrospectively compared with 34 contemporary cases treated with open radical nephrectomy.
RESULTS: For the 53 retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomies mean tumor size was 4.6 cm. (range 2 to 12), surgical time was 2.9 hours (range 1.2 to 4.5) and blood loss was 128 cc. Mean specimen weight was 484 gm. (range 52 to 1,328), and concomitant adrenalectomy was performed in 72% of patients. Mean analgesic requirement was 31 mg. morphine sulfate equivalent. Average hospital stay was 1.6 days, with 68% of patients discharged from the hospital within 23 hours of the procedure. Minor complications occurred in 8 patients (17%) and major complications occurred in 2 (4%) who required conversion to open surgery. Various parameters, including patient age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, tumor size (5 versus 6.1 cm.), specimen weight (605 versus 638 gm.) and surgical time (3.1 versus 3.1 hours), were comparable between patients undergoing laparoscopic (34) and open (34) radical nephrectomy. However, laparoscopy resulted in decreased blood loss (p <0.001), hospital stay (p <0.001), analgesic requirements (p <0.001) and convalescence (p = 0.005). Complications occurred in 13% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 24% in the open group.
CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneoscopy is a reliable, effective and, in our hands, the preferred technique of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. At our institution retroperitoneoscopy has emerged as an attractive alternative to open radical nephrectomy in patients with T1-T2N0M0 renal tumors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10799156     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67516-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  32 in total

1.  Analysis of complications from 600 retroperitoneoscopic procedures of the upper urinary tract during the last 10 years.

Authors:  Dimitri Liapis; Alexandre de la Taille; Guillaume Ploussard; Grégoire Robert; Laurence Bastien; Andras Hoznek; Dimitri Vordos; Claude Abbou; Laurent Salomon
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-09-19       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for the management of pelvic-ureteric junction obstruction in horseshoe kidney: our initial experience.

Authors:  Rahul Janak Sinha; Ankur Jhanwar; Vishwajeet Singh; Gaurav Prakash
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2016-07-08

3.  [Nephrectomy: complication management].

Authors:  S Pahernik; C Bergsträßer; D Teber; M Hohenfellner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Toward greater adoption of minimally invasive and nephron-sparing surgical techniques for renal cell cancer in the United States.

Authors:  Matthew P Banegas; Linda C Harlan; Bhupinder Mann; K Robin Yabroff
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 3.498

5.  Retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy with a small incision for renal cell carcinoma: comparison with the conventional method.

Authors:  Hiroki Ito; Kazuhide Makiyama; Takashi Kawahara; Futoshi Sano; Takayuki Murakami; Narihiko Hayashi; Yasuhide Miyoshi; Noboru Nakaigawa; Masahiro Yao; Yoshinobu Kubota
Journal:  J Negat Results Biomed       Date:  2011-08-16

6.  Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy: the experience of an Irish teaching hospital.

Authors:  K A Foley; M S El-Jack; J Hegarty
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2002 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 7.  Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  D Korolija; S Sauerland; S Wood-Dauphinée; C C Abbou; E Eypasch; M García Caballero; M A Lumsden; B Millat; J R T Monson; G Nilsson; R Pointner; W Schwenk; A Shamiyeh; A Szold; E Targarona; B Ure; E Neugebauer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy in 210 consecutive patients: outcomes, cost, and changes in practice patterns.

Authors:  K W Kercher; B T Heniford; B D Matthews; T I Smith; A E Lincourt; D H Hayes; L B Eskind; P B Irby; C M Teigland
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-10-23       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Bilateral laparoscopic nephrectomy with simultaneous peritoneal dialysis: a new era.

Authors:  Caroline Booth; Imran Mushtaq; Susan Rigden
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2004-06-16       Impact factor: 3.714

Review 10.  Watchful waiting for small renal masses.

Authors:  Kamal Mattar; Michael A S Jewett
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.092

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.