Journal of endourology · 2018
A Modified Application of Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Implantation: A Revolution from the Laparoscope- to the Nephroscope-Assisted Surgery.
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.
Hu Ju-Chuan, Chiu Kun-Yuan, Wang Shian-Shiang, Chen Chuan-Su, Ho Hao-Chung, Yang Cheng-Kuang, Chen Cheng-Che, Wang Shu-Chi, Lin Chia-Yen, Hung Sheng-Chun, Cheng Chen-Li, Li Jian-Ri
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: A laparoscope provides many advantages when establishing abdominal access for peritoneal dialysis (PD), particularly with direct observation and correction of the catheter's position. However, laparoscopic placement requires specialized equipment and usually requires using more than one working port, which may increase the potential for complications, including dialysis leakage. We modified the surgical technique by using a nephroscope, rather than a laparoscope. This study aimed to illustrate this modified technique step by step and compare the postoperative outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was based on a retrospective chart review of 397 consecutive patients who underwent either laparoscope- or nephroscope-assisted PD catheter insertion between September 2005 and December 2016 in our institute, as performed by a single surgeon. Data were collected and analyzed to compare the characteristics of the patients, including age and gender, along with surgical outcomes and complications between the two groups.
RESULTS: Two-hundred fourteen patients underwent laparoscopy implantation, whereas 183 patients received the nephroscope-assisted method. More patients had previously undergone abdominal surgery in the nephroscopy group (29% vs 18.7%, p = 0.035) than those in the laparoscopy group. There was no significant difference in the 1-year catheter survival (82.5% vs 79.4%, p = 0.734) rate between the two groups. A total of five patients experienced dialysis leakage within the laparoscopy group, whereas none had dialysis leakage in the nephroscopy group.
CONCLUSIONS: The surgical times were significantly shorter in the nephroscopy group. Although comparison of the complication rate between the two groups revealed no statistical significance, there were trends that showed there were less early surgical complications in the nephroscopy group.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was based on a retrospective chart review of 397 consecutive patients who underwent either laparoscope- or nephroscope-assisted PD catheter insertion between September 2005 and December 2016 in our institute, as performed by a single surgeon. Data were collected and analyzed to compare the characteristics of the patients, including age and gender, along with surgical outcomes and complications between the two groups.
RESULTS: Two-hundred fourteen patients underwent laparoscopy implantation, whereas 183 patients received the nephroscope-assisted method. More patients had previously undergone abdominal surgery in the nephroscopy group (29% vs 18.7%, p = 0.035) than those in the laparoscopy group. There was no significant difference in the 1-year catheter survival (82.5% vs 79.4%, p = 0.734) rate between the two groups. A total of five patients experienced dialysis leakage within the laparoscopy group, whereas none had dialysis leakage in the nephroscopy group.
CONCLUSIONS: The surgical times were significantly shorter in the nephroscopy group. Although comparison of the complication rate between the two groups revealed no statistical significance, there were trends that showed there were less early surgical complications in the nephroscopy group.