Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Single-surgeon Matched Cohort Study of 150 Patients
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Single-surgeon Matched Cohort Study of 150 Patients
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.058
复制
发表时间：
2010-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Kaouk, Jihad H.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Haber, Georges-Pascal;White, Wesley M.;Kaouk, Jihad H.
在2002年3月至2009年8月之间，单个外科医生在2002年3月至2009年8月之间，对261名连续LPN的近期审查的匹配患者进行了对261例未来的患者的回顾性评论（n = 186）或RPN（n = 75）由一个外科医生是执行。将患者的年龄，性别，体重指数（BMI），美国麻醉师学会（ASA）评分以及肿瘤大小，侧面和位置匹配。比较了围手术期的结果。比较了接受RPN（n = 75）或LPN（n = 75）的150例患者的匹配队列。相对于患者年龄（p = .17），BMI（p = .68），ASA评分（p = .96），术前估计估计的肾小球滤过率（EGFR; P = .54），这两个队列之间没有显着差异。或肿瘤大小（p = .17）。 RPN的平均手术时间为LPN为200分197分钟（p = .75）。 RPN队列中的平均估计失血（EBL）较高（323 vs 222 mL，p = .01）。在温暖的缺血时间（18.2分钟vs 20.3分钟，p = .27），住院时间（P = .84），EGFR的百分比变化（P = .80）或不良事件（P）（P）（P） = .52）。所有手术边缘均为阴性。尽管在本研究中包括了最初的RPN手术经验，并且与同一外科医生的LPN经验相比，RPN至少提供了与LPN的可比结果。泌尿科76：754-758，2010。（c）2010年Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVES To present comparative outcomes among matched patients who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) or laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) by a single surgeon at a single institution.METHODS Between March 2002 and August 2009, a retrospective review of 261 consecutive patients who underwent LPN (n = 186) or RPN (n = 75) by a single surgeon was performed. Patients were matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and tumor size, side, and location. Perioperative outcomes were compared.RESULTS A matched cohort of 150 patients who underwent RPN (n = 75) or LPN (n = 75) were compared. There was no significant difference between the 2 cohorts with respect to patient age (P = .17), BMI (P = .68), ASA score (P = .96), preoperative estimated glomerulofiltration rate (eGFR; P = .54), or tumor size (P = .17). Mean operative time for RPN was 200 vs 197 minutes for LPN (P = .75). Mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was higher in the RPN cohort (323 vs 222 mL, P = .01). There was no significant difference with respect to warm ischemia time (18.2 minutes vs 20.3 minutes, P = .27), length of hospitalization (P = .84), percent change in eGFR (P = .80), or adverse events (P = .52). All surgical margins were negative.CONCLUSIONS Although initial surgical experience with RPN was included in this study and compared with a vast experience in LPN by the same surgeon, RPN offers at least comparable outcomes to LPN. UROLOGY 76: 754-758, 2010. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc.