Literature DB >> 22177193

Importance of cosmesis to patients undergoing renal surgery: a comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS), laparoscopic and open surgery.

Ephrem O Olweny1, Saad A Mir, Sara L Best, Samuel K Park, Chester Donnally Iii, Jeffrey A Cadeddu, Chad R Tracy.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Study Type - Therapy (case series). Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Studies in other surgical populations have found that scarring is a relatively unimportant preoperative patient consideration when compared with surgical cure and safety, but that younger age was a significant factor influencing preference for 'scarless' surgery. The present study corroborates the findings of previous series, among patients who were contemplating kidney surgery.
OBJECTIVE: • To evaluate patient attitudes towards cosmesis relative to other considerations, before and after undergoing laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) vs laparoscopic/robot-assisted vs open kidney surgery.
METHODS:Participants were provided with a survey querying demographic information, surgical history and importance of scarring relative to other surgical outcomes and considerations. • The relative importance of each outcome was recorded on a nine-level ranking scale, ranging from 1 (most important) to 9 (least important). • The median scores for each outcome were compared before and after surgery using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and by surgical approach using the Kruskal-Wallis test. • The importance of scarring was further analysed according to age (≤ 50 vs >50 years), surgical indication (oncological vs non-oncological), gender, and proportion of patients who had undergone previous abdominal surgery.
RESULTS: • A total of 90 patients completed surveys before surgery, of whom 65 (72.2%) also completed surveys after surgery. • 'Surgeon reputation' and 'no complications' were the most important considerations before surgery (median scores 2 and 3, respectively) and after surgery (median scores of 2 for both). • 'Size/number of scars' was the least important consideration before surgery (median score 8) and the second least important consideration after surgery (median score 7). • The median score for 'size/number of scars' was significantly higher for the LESS cohort before surgery (laparoscopic/robot-assisted vs LESS vs open surgery: 8.5 vs 6 vs 9; P = 0.003), but was nonsignificant after surgery (laparoscopic/robotic vs LESS vs open surgery: 7 vs 6.5 vs 7.5; P = 0.83). • The median score for 'size/number of scars' before surgery was significantly higher for younger patients (P = 0.05) and those with non-oncological surgical indications (P < 0.001), but there was no significant difference in this outcome for these sub-groups after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: • For most patients contemplating urological surgery, cosmesis is of less concern than surgeon reputation and avoidance of surgical complications. • Cosmesis may be a more important preoperative consideration for younger patients and those with benign conditions, which warrants further investigation.
© 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22177193     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10784.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  9 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty:recent developments in efficacy, outcomes, and new techniques.

Authors:  Casey A Seideman; Aditya Bagrodia; Jeffrey Gahan; Jeffrey A Cadeddu
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Retroperitoneal laparoendoscopic single-site surgery for the treatment of retrocaval ureter.

Authors:  Ning Kang; Jun-hui Zhang; Yi-nong Niu; Jian-wen Wang; Xi-quan Tian; Yan Yong; Nian-zeng Xing
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-10-10       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Retropubic, laparoscopic and mini-laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective assessment of patient scar satisfaction.

Authors:  Carmelo Quattrone; Antonio Cicione; Carlos Oliveira; Riccardo Autorino; Francesco Cantiello; Vincenzo Mirone; Marco De Sio; Luca Carrubbo; Rocco Damiano; Carlo Pavone; Estevão Lima
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-10-26       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Frontiers in robot-assisted retroperitoneal oncological surgery.

Authors:  Wesley W Ludwig; Michael A Gorin; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Single-incision and NOTES cholecystectomy, are there clinical or cosmetic advantages when compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A case-control study comparing single-incision, transvaginal, and conventional laparoscopic technique for cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Peter B van den Boezem; Simone Velthuis; Harm J Lourens; Miguel A Cuesta; Colin Sietses
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  True single-port cholecystectomy with ICG cholangiography through a single 15-mm trocar using the new surgical platform "symphonX": first human case study with a commercially available device.

Authors:  Rabi R Datta; Georg Dieplinger; Roger Wahba; Robert Kleinert; Michael Thomas; Florian Gebauer; Lars Schiffmann; Dirk L Stippel; Christiane J Bruns; Hans F Fuchs
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Cosmetic Outcome of Robotic Surgery Compared to Laparoscopic Surgery for Benign Gynecologic Disease.

Authors:  Esra Ozbasli; Ozguc Takmaz; Nazlı Albayrak; Mete Gungor Md
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2022 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery: recent advances in urology.

Authors:  Riccardo Autorino; Roman Sosnowski; Marco De Sio; Omero Simone; Ali Khalifeh; Jihad H Kaouk
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2012-12-11

9.  Comparison of modified transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site nephroureterectomy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy: initial experience.

Authors:  Yang Shen; Hesong Ye; Qingyi Zhu; Jian Su; Chen Zhu; Zhonglei Deng; Long Ma; Lin Yuan
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 1.195

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.