PURPOSE: It is ideal to use not a transperitoneal but a retroperitoneal approach for both open and endoscopic partial nephrectomy. We compared the results of retroperitoneoscopic nephron-sparing surgery for small renal tumors using a microwave tissue coagulator without renal pedicle clamping with those of a retroperitoneal open procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1996 and 2002, eight patients with small renal tumors underwent retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy without renal ischemia, and nine patients with small renal tumors underwent open partial nephrectomy via a retroperitoneal approach. Both groups were operated on using a microwave tissue coagulator. RESULTS: Retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy without renal ischemia was performed without any major or minor complications in any patient. The mean operation time for retroperitoneoscopic surgery was significantly longer than that for open partial nephrectomy (221.9 minutes v 145.9 minutes; P = 0.0004). However, the mean estimated blood loss for retroperitoneoscopic surgery was less than that for open partial nephrectomy (137.5 mL v 334.8 mL; P = 0.012). In addition, the retroperitoneoscopic group seemed to recover more rapidly than the open surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneoscopic nephron-sparing surgery of small renal tumors using a microwave tissue coagulator without renal ischemia is feasible as minimally invasive procedure. It results in saving renal function, minimal blood loss, and rapid recovery.
PURPOSE: It is ideal to use not a transperitoneal but a retroperitoneal approach for both open and endoscopic partial nephrectomy. We compared the results of retroperitoneoscopic nephron-sparing surgery for small renal tumors using a microwave tissue coagulator without renal pedicle clamping with those of a retroperitoneal open procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1996 and 2002, eight patients with small renal tumors underwent retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy without renal ischemia, and nine patients with small renal tumors underwent open partial nephrectomy via a retroperitoneal approach. Both groups were operated on using a microwave tissue coagulator. RESULTS: Retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy without renal ischemia was performed without any major or minor complications in any patient. The mean operation time for retroperitoneoscopic surgery was significantly longer than that for open partial nephrectomy (221.9 minutes v 145.9 minutes; P = 0.0004). However, the mean estimated blood loss for retroperitoneoscopic surgery was less than that for open partial nephrectomy (137.5 mL v 334.8 mL; P = 0.012). In addition, the retroperitoneoscopic group seemed to recover more rapidly than the open surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneoscopic nephron-sparing surgery of small renal tumors using a microwave tissue coagulator without renal ischemia is feasible as minimally invasive procedure. It results in saving renal function, minimal blood loss, and rapid recovery.