Actas urologicas espanolas · 2011
[Robotic partial nephrectomy: an initial experience in 25 consecutive cases].
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Castillo O A, Rodríguez-Carlin A, López-Fontana G, Vidal-Mora I, Gómez R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To report our initial experience with robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) in a series of 25 consecutively-operated patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of 25 consecutive patients who underwent RPN from April 2010 to February 2011 were studied. We used the da Vinci S HD robotic system with transperitoneal approach. Total renal hilum control was used 22 cases and 3 patients underwent selective renal parenchymal compression with an ad-hoc device.
RESULTS: Mean age was 55.8 years (26-77) with a male/female ratio of 2:1. Mean operative time was 117.6 minutes (54-205) and the warm ischemia time was 20.2 minutes (9-34). Mean estimated blood loss was 440 ml (20-2000) and the mean tumor size was 3.25 cm (1-5.3). Five patients (20%) had complications, the most frequent being intraoperative bleeding (Clavien II). There was no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery. Mean hospital stay was 3.5 days (1-7). The pathological study revealed renal cell carcinoma in 19 cases and benign lesions in 6 patients. There were no positive surgical margins and no mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results show that RPN is a feasible surgical approach in small-sized renal tumors.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of 25 consecutive patients who underwent RPN from April 2010 to February 2011 were studied. We used the da Vinci S HD robotic system with transperitoneal approach. Total renal hilum control was used 22 cases and 3 patients underwent selective renal parenchymal compression with an ad-hoc device.
RESULTS: Mean age was 55.8 years (26-77) with a male/female ratio of 2:1. Mean operative time was 117.6 minutes (54-205) and the warm ischemia time was 20.2 minutes (9-34). Mean estimated blood loss was 440 ml (20-2000) and the mean tumor size was 3.25 cm (1-5.3). Five patients (20%) had complications, the most frequent being intraoperative bleeding (Clavien II). There was no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery. Mean hospital stay was 3.5 days (1-7). The pathological study revealed renal cell carcinoma in 19 cases and benign lesions in 6 patients. There were no positive surgical margins and no mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results show that RPN is a feasible surgical approach in small-sized renal tumors.