I Gockel1, W Kneist, A Heintz, J Beyer, T Junginger. 1. Department of General and Abdominal Surgery, Johannes Gutenberg University, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55101 Mainz, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic adrenalectomy is currently performed using either a retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach. The aim of this study was to determine which of these is the optimal surgical technique in a prospectively designed analysis of a large series of patients operated on by a single team over a 10-year period. METHODS: From February 1994 to March 2004, 267 endoscopic adrenalectomies (retroperitoneal in 132 patients and transperitoneal in 135 patients) were performed in 245 consecutive patients. There were 102 right lateral and 121 left lateral procedures (22 patients had a bilateral procedure). The most prevalent indication was incidentaloma (35.9%), followed by pheochromocytoma and Conn's adenoma. RESULTS: The endoscopic procedure was performed in 238 of 245 patients (97.1%). The conversion rate was 1.5% for the transperitoneal approach and 3.8% for the retroperitoneal approach. No statistically significant influence was noted for the parameters of intraoperative blood loss, rate of postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay with regard to the surgical technique. The operative time and the learning curve proved to be significantly longer for the retroperitoneal adrenalectomy. In addition, a variance analysis identified tumor size (>5 cm) as a significant factor influencing the operative time, whereas body mass index and localization (right/left lateral) did not prove significant. CONCLUSION: Independent of the underlying pathology, endoscopic adrenalectomy using either the trans- or retroperitoneal approach can be performed in 96-98% of all patients. Differences between the two techniques in operative time and learning curves clearly favor the transperitoneal adrenalectomy.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic adrenalectomy is currently performed using either a retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach. The aim of this study was to determine which of these is the optimal surgical technique in a prospectively designed analysis of a large series of patients operated on by a single team over a 10-year period. METHODS: From February 1994 to March 2004, 267 endoscopic adrenalectomies (retroperitoneal in 132 patients and transperitoneal in 135 patients) were performed in 245 consecutive patients. There were 102 right lateral and 121 left lateral procedures (22 patients had a bilateral procedure). The most prevalent indication was incidentaloma (35.9%), followed by pheochromocytoma and Conn's adenoma. RESULTS: The endoscopic procedure was performed in 238 of 245 patients (97.1%). The conversion rate was 1.5% for the transperitoneal approach and 3.8% for the retroperitoneal approach. No statistically significant influence was noted for the parameters of intraoperative blood loss, rate of postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay with regard to the surgical technique. The operative time and the learning curve proved to be significantly longer for the retroperitoneal adrenalectomy. In addition, a variance analysis identified tumor size (>5 cm) as a significant factor influencing the operative time, whereas body mass index and localization (right/left lateral) did not prove significant. CONCLUSION: Independent of the underlying pathology, endoscopic adrenalectomy using either the trans- or retroperitoneal approach can be performed in 96-98% of all patients. Differences between the two techniques in operative time and learning curves clearly favor the transperitoneal adrenalectomy.
Authors: M K Walz; K Peitgen; M V Walz; R Hoermann; B Saller; R M Giebler; F Jockenhövel; T Philipp; C E Broelsch; F W Eigler; K Mann Journal: World J Surg Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: G B Thompson; C S Grant; J A van Heerden; R T Schlinkert; W F Young; D R Farley; D M Ilstrup Journal: Surgery Date: 1997-12 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Deron J Tessier; Rafael Iglesias; William C Chapman; Kent Kercher; Brent D Matthews; D Lee Gorden; L Michael Brunt Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-04-29 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Patrick Heger; Pascal Probst; Felix J Hüttner; Käthe Gooßen; Tanja Proctor; Beat P Müller-Stich; Oliver Strobel; Markus W Büchler; Markus K Diener Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Paolo Miccoli; Gabriele Materazzi; Michael Brauckhoff; Carlo Enrico Ambrosini; Mario Miccoli; Henning Dralle Journal: World J Surg Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.352