Clinical genitourinary cancer · 2017
Does Ureteral Catheter Insertion Decrease the Risk of Urinary Leakage After Partial Nephrectomy in Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma?
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Yoo Sangjun, You Dalsan, Jeong In Gab, Song Cheryn, Hong Bumsik, Hong Jun Hyuk, Ahn Hanjong, Kim Choung-Soo
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to evaluate the impact of preoperative ureteral catheter insertion on urinary leakage after partial nephrectomy (PN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma.
METHODS: We reviewed the data of 893 patients with renal cell carcinoma who underwent PN and divided them according to ureteral catheter placement. The impact of ureteral catheter placement on postoperative urinary leakage was evaluated by using multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: Ureteral catheters were inserted in 397 (44.5%) patients. Patients with ureteral catheter insertion had larger tumors (2.4 vs. 2.6 cm; P = .031); however, the RENAL nephrometry scores were comparable (P = .131). Robotic PN was more common in patients with ureteral catheters (11.1 vs. 53.9%; P < .001). Urinary leakage did not differ according to ureteral catheter placement (3.4 vs. 3.5%; P = .936). Although tumor size (P = .002), ureteral catheter insertion (P < .001), and operative methods (P < .001) were significantly different according to surgeons, the rate of urinary leakage was similar (surgeon A: 4.0%, surgeon B: 4.6%, surgeon C: 1.5%, others: 2.9%; P = .294). In multivariate analysis of preoperative variables, age and RENAL nephrometry scores were associated with urinary leakage. In multivariate analysis of preoperative and intraoperative variables, the operative method, collecting system status, and intraoperative transfusion, but not ureteral catheter insertion, were related to urinary leakage.
CONCLUSIONS: Ureteral catheter insertion does not appear to reduce the risk of urinary leakage after PN, and visibility during PN with meticulous bleeding control is important in preventing urinary leakage after PN.
METHODS: We reviewed the data of 893 patients with renal cell carcinoma who underwent PN and divided them according to ureteral catheter placement. The impact of ureteral catheter placement on postoperative urinary leakage was evaluated by using multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: Ureteral catheters were inserted in 397 (44.5%) patients. Patients with ureteral catheter insertion had larger tumors (2.4 vs. 2.6 cm; P = .031); however, the RENAL nephrometry scores were comparable (P = .131). Robotic PN was more common in patients with ureteral catheters (11.1 vs. 53.9%; P < .001). Urinary leakage did not differ according to ureteral catheter placement (3.4 vs. 3.5%; P = .936). Although tumor size (P = .002), ureteral catheter insertion (P < .001), and operative methods (P < .001) were significantly different according to surgeons, the rate of urinary leakage was similar (surgeon A: 4.0%, surgeon B: 4.6%, surgeon C: 1.5%, others: 2.9%; P = .294). In multivariate analysis of preoperative variables, age and RENAL nephrometry scores were associated with urinary leakage. In multivariate analysis of preoperative and intraoperative variables, the operative method, collecting system status, and intraoperative transfusion, but not ureteral catheter insertion, were related to urinary leakage.
CONCLUSIONS: Ureteral catheter insertion does not appear to reduce the risk of urinary leakage after PN, and visibility during PN with meticulous bleeding control is important in preventing urinary leakage after PN.