Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2024
Surgical proficiency in laparoscopic radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion and its adequacy for the execution of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Suzuki Atsuto, Ito Hiroki, Uemura Koichi, Muraoka Kentaro, Tatenuma Tomoyuki, Osaka Kimito, Yokomizo Yumiko, Hayashi Narihiko, Hasumi Hisashi, Makiyama Kazuhide
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The number of facilities adopting intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) using robots instead of extracorporeal urinary diversion (ECUD) is increasing. However, guidance on how to introduce robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) + ICUD in each urological institute remains unclear. This study aimed to verify the feasibility of the transition from laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) + ECUD to RARC + ICUD.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 26 consecutive patients who underwent ICUD with an ileal conduit after RARC between 2018 and 2020 (RARC + ICUD early group). We then compared these patients with 26 consecutive patients who underwent ECUD with an ileal conduit after LRC between 2012 and 2019 (LRC + ECUD late group) at Yokohama City University Hospital.
RESULTS: In the RARC + ICUD early group compared with the LRC + ECUD late group, the median total operation time was 516 versus 532.5 min (P = .217); time to cystectomy, 191 versus 206.5 min (P = .234); time of urinary diversion with an ileal conduit, 198 versus 220 min (P = .016); postoperative maximum C-reactive protein levels, 6.98 versus 12.46 mg/L (P = .001); number of days to oral intake, 3 versus 5 days (P = .003); length of hospital stay, 17 versus 32 days (P < .001). The postoperative complication rates (within 90 days) were 23.1% and 42.3% in the RARC + ICUD early and LRC + ECUD late groups, respectively (P = .237). Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3 was noted in 1 and 4 patients in the RARC + ICUD early and LRC + ECUD late groups, respectively (P = .350).
CONCLUSION: Regarding perioperative outcomes, the RARC + ICUD early group was not inferior to the LRC + ECUD late group. This study suggests the feasibility of a transition from LRC + ECUD to RARC + ICUD.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 26 consecutive patients who underwent ICUD with an ileal conduit after RARC between 2018 and 2020 (RARC + ICUD early group). We then compared these patients with 26 consecutive patients who underwent ECUD with an ileal conduit after LRC between 2012 and 2019 (LRC + ECUD late group) at Yokohama City University Hospital.
RESULTS: In the RARC + ICUD early group compared with the LRC + ECUD late group, the median total operation time was 516 versus 532.5 min (P = .217); time to cystectomy, 191 versus 206.5 min (P = .234); time of urinary diversion with an ileal conduit, 198 versus 220 min (P = .016); postoperative maximum C-reactive protein levels, 6.98 versus 12.46 mg/L (P = .001); number of days to oral intake, 3 versus 5 days (P = .003); length of hospital stay, 17 versus 32 days (P < .001). The postoperative complication rates (within 90 days) were 23.1% and 42.3% in the RARC + ICUD early and LRC + ECUD late groups, respectively (P = .237). Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3 was noted in 1 and 4 patients in the RARC + ICUD early and LRC + ECUD late groups, respectively (P = .350).
CONCLUSION: Regarding perioperative outcomes, the RARC + ICUD early group was not inferior to the LRC + ECUD late group. This study suggests the feasibility of a transition from LRC + ECUD to RARC + ICUD.