European review for medical and pharmacological sciences · 2023
Comparison of Bipolar vascular sealing and conventional back-table dissection in terms of post-renal transplant drainage and back-table preparation times.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Eren E, Tokac M, Ozcelik U, Sahin T, Tellioglu G, Peksen C, Dinckan A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The usage of vessel sealing devices has been gaining popularity in all surgical specialties. Post-renal transplant drain placement is a common practice among transplant surgeons. However, prolonged drainage accompanied by surgical wound complications and perirenal fluid collections is a frequent complication experienced by the recipients. This study aimed to compare Bipolar vascular sealing with conventional back-table dissection in terms of post-renal transplant drainage duration, amount, surgical wound complication, and back-table preparation time.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A double-blind clinical study randomizes recipients into 2 groups, using Bipolar vascular sealing (Group 1) and conventional ligation (Group 2) back-table dissection. Variables such as recipient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), cause of end-stage renal disease, amount and duration of surgical drainage, back-table time, and cold ischemia time (CIT) were collected prospectively.
RESULTS: Ninety-eight consecutive living donor (M/F: 69/29) renal transplant recipients were enrolled in this prospective randomized clinical trial. There were 49 patients in each group. The mean BMI was 26.76±4.57. There was no difference among the groups regarding recipient age, BMI, total drainage, and surgical drainage duration. The surgical site infection rate was not different between the two groups. Group 1 had significantly shorter back-table time, with mean back-table time being 15.26±2.51 minutes in Group 1 and 28.83±6.27 minutes in Group 2 (p<0.001). The CIT was also significantly different between the 2 groups (p<0.001). In Group 1, the recorded CIT was 43.3±11.4, and in Group 2, 57.1±13.3 minutes.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of Bipolar vascular sealing to seal lymphatic vessels at the back-table is feasible, safe, and easy to perform. It also expedites the dissection and shortens the time required for back-table graft preparation.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A double-blind clinical study randomizes recipients into 2 groups, using Bipolar vascular sealing (Group 1) and conventional ligation (Group 2) back-table dissection. Variables such as recipient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), cause of end-stage renal disease, amount and duration of surgical drainage, back-table time, and cold ischemia time (CIT) were collected prospectively.
RESULTS: Ninety-eight consecutive living donor (M/F: 69/29) renal transplant recipients were enrolled in this prospective randomized clinical trial. There were 49 patients in each group. The mean BMI was 26.76±4.57. There was no difference among the groups regarding recipient age, BMI, total drainage, and surgical drainage duration. The surgical site infection rate was not different between the two groups. Group 1 had significantly shorter back-table time, with mean back-table time being 15.26±2.51 minutes in Group 1 and 28.83±6.27 minutes in Group 2 (p<0.001). The CIT was also significantly different between the 2 groups (p<0.001). In Group 1, the recorded CIT was 43.3±11.4, and in Group 2, 57.1±13.3 minutes.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of Bipolar vascular sealing to seal lymphatic vessels at the back-table is feasible, safe, and easy to perform. It also expedites the dissection and shortens the time required for back-table graft preparation.