Editorial Comment to Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy With Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Ileal Conduit: A Matched-Pair Comparison in a Multicenter Cohort in Japan
Editorial Comment to Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy With Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Ileal Conduit: A Matched-Pair Comparison in a Multicenter Cohort in Japan
复制标题
对体内与体外回肠导管腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术围手术期和肿瘤学结果的编辑评论：日本多中心队列的配对比较
DOI：
10.1111/iju.14252
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Ohyama C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hatakeyama S;Ohyama C
微创膀胱癌根治术是治疗肌肉浸润性膀胱癌的标准方法之一[1]、[2]、[3]，但与体外回肠代膀胱术相比，腹腔镜回肠代膀胱术(ICUD-IC)的疗效尚不清楚。Kanno I等人。比较了肌肉浸润性膀胱癌腹腔镜根治性膀胱切除术后单纯腹腔镜ICUD-IC和体外回肠代膀胱术的围手术期和肿瘤学结果。[4]在455名患者中，他们使用配对(72 I比72)，他们得出结论：腹腔镜ICUD-IC是安全可行的，术后肠道恢复更快，创伤相关并发症发生率减少，术后并发症发生率和肿瘤学结果与体外回肠代膀胱术相当。正如作者所说，纯腹腔镜的主要缺点是在有限的工作领域存在困难，特别是在输尿管肠吻合方面。在这方面，大多数泌尿科医生同意机器人手术治疗ICUD-IC的好处。[摘自文章]《国际泌尿学杂志》的版权属于Wiley-Blackwell的财产，未经版权所有者明确的书面许可，不得将其内容复制或通过电子邮件发送到多个网站或发布到列表服务器。但是，用户可以打印、下载或通过电子邮件发送文章供个人使用。这篇摘要可以删节。对复制品的准确性不作任何保证。用户应参考该材料的原始出版版本，以获取完整摘要。版权适用于所有摘要。
Minimally invasive radical cystectomy for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer is one of the standard therapies.[1],[2],[3] However, the benefit of laparoscopic intracorporeal ileal conduit urinary diversion (ICUD-IC) remains unclear in comparison with extracorporeal ileal conduit urinary diversion. Kanno I et al i. compared the perioperative and oncological outcomes of pure laparoscopic ICUD-IC with extracorporeal ileal conduit urinary diversion after laparoscopic radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.[4] Of 455 patients, they used matched pairs (72 I vs i 72), and they concluded that the laparoscopic ICUD-IC is safe, feasible with faster postoperative bowel recovery, decreased wound-related complication rates, and comparable postoperative complication rates and oncological outcomes compared with extracorporeal ileal conduit urinary diversion. As the authors stated, the substantial disadvantage of pure laparoscopy is the difficulty in the limited working field, especially in the ureteroenteric anastomosis.[5] In this regard, the majority of urologists agree with the benefit of robotic surgery for ICUD-IC.[Extracted from the article]Copyright of International Journal of Urology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. Copyright applies to all Abstracts.