Literature DB >> 11992043

Comparison of hand assisted and standard laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy for the management of localized transitional cell carcinoma.

Jaime Landman1, Ronan Y Lev, Sam Bhayani, Gregory Alberts, Jamil Rehman, John G Pattaras, R Sherburne Figenshau, Adam S Kibel, Ralph V Clayman, Elspeth McDougall.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Hand assisted laparoscopy affords the surgeon tactile sensation and blunt dissection, which are currently limited using the standard laparoscopic technique. Therefore, we compared standard and hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy for localized upper tract transitional cell carcinoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 27 patients who underwent standard (11) or hand assisted (16) laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy between April 1998 and January 2001 were retrospectively reviewed. The parameters of efficacy, efficiency, safety and convalescence were compared.
RESULTS: Mean patient age was 64 and 66 years (p = 0.72) in the standard and hand assisted groups, and the mean American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 2.5 and 2.7 (p = 0.64), respectively. All standard and 15 of the 16 hand assisted (94%) procedures were successfully completed via laparoscopy. Total operative time was more than 1 hour shorter for hand assisted than for laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (4.9 versus 6.1 hours, p = 0.055). Mean estimated blood loss was similar in the standard and hand assisted groups (190 and 201 ml., p = 0.78). In each group 1 patient required blood transfusion. Mean specimen weight was significantly higher in hand assisted cases (576 versus 335 gm., p = 0.036). Mean time to oral intake was similar in patients who underwent standard and hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (13 and 20 hours, respectively, p = 0.45). The mean analgesic requirement was also similar (29 and 33 mg. morphine sulfate, respectively, p = 0.83). Mean hospital stay in uncomplicated cases was similar for standard and hand assisted surgery (2.9 and 2.5 days, respectively). Overall hospital stay in the 2 cohorts was also similar (3.3 and 4.5 days, respectively, p = 0.59). Four patients per group experienced postoperative complications. There were no deaths in the standard group but 1 patient (6%) in the hand assisted group died postoperatively. Mean time to partial and complete convalescence in the standard and hand assisted groups was 2.4 and 5.2, and 3.5 and 8.0 weeks, while mean followup was 27.4 and 9.6 months, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard laparoscopy hand assisted laparoscopy decreases operative time without significantly altering short-term parameters of convalescence. However, long-term convalescence after hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy is 1 to 3 weeks longer (p = 0.27). Longer followup in the hand assisted cohort is necessary to determine whether there are any differences in the 2 methods in regard to cancer control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11992043

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


  9 in total

1.  Treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a review of surgical and adjuvant therapy.

Authors:  Kalyan C Latchamsetty; Christopher R Porter
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2006

2.  Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy without hand-assisted device.

Authors:  Sung Hyun Paick; Ja Hyeon Ku; Cheol Kwak; Sang Eun Lee
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 3.  The advantages of hand-assisted laparoscopy.

Authors:  Ravi Munver; Joseph J Del Pizzo; R Ernest Sosa
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.862

4.  Surgical outcome predictor analysis following hand-assisted or pure laparoscopic transperitoneal nephroureterectomy using the Taiwan upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma database.

Authors:  Chih-Chun Kuo; Guang-Heng Chen; Chao-Hsiang Chang; Chao-Yuan Huang; Chung-Hsin Chen; Ching-Chia Li; Wen-Jeng Wu; Chih-Chin Yu; Chi-Wen Lo; Yung-Tai Chen; Shin-Hong Chen; Pai-Yu Cheng; Thomas Y Hsueh; Allen W Chiu; Po-Han Lin; Jen-Shu Tseng; Jen-Tai Lin; Yuan-Hong Jiang; Chia-Chang Wu; Wei-Yu Lin; Hsu-Che Huang; Han-Sun Chiang; Bing-Juin Chiang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-09-01

5.  Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy and management of the distal ureter: a review of current techniques and outcomes.

Authors:  Davis P Viprakasit; Amanda M Macejko; Robert B Nadler
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2009-01-08

6.  Comprehensive management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Georgios Koukourakis; Georgios Zacharias; Michael Koukourakis; Kiriaki Pistevou-Gobaki; Christos Papaloukas; Athanasios Kostakopoulos; Vassilios Kouloulias
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2008-12-10

7.  Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Jay D Raman; Michael A Palese; Casey K Ng; Stephen A Boorjian; Douglas S Scherr; Joseph J Del Pizzo; R Ernest Sosa
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2006 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Comparison of laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and open surgical nephroureterectomy.

Authors:  Hiroshi Kitamura; Toshihiro Maeda; Toshiaki Tanaka; Fumimasa Fukuta; Ko Kobayashi; Naotaka Nishiyama; Satoshi Takahashi; Naoya Masumori
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2014 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

9.  Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy versus Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Matched Comparison Study.

Authors:  Che-Yuan Hu; Cheng-Kuang Yang; Chao-Yuan Huang; Yen-Chuan Ou; Shun-Fa Hung; Shiu-Dong Chung; Yeong-Shiau Pu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-11       Impact factor: 3.411

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.