Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2014 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 4

Robot yardımlı laparoskopik transperitoneal pyeloplasti sonuçlarımız: On sekiz olguluk seri

Outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty procedures: A series of 18 patients

Pages
193–198
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Due to our experience, RALP is a safe and feasible minimally invasive approach in patients with UPJO with excellent surgical and functional outcomes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: We evaluated outcomes of our robot-assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty (RALP) procedures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and methods: Between July 2011 and March 2014, 18 RALP procedures were performed at our instutition.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Due to our experience, RALP is a safe and feasible minimally invasive approach in patients with UPJO with excellent surgical and functional outcomes.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: We evaluated outcomes of our robot-assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty (RALP) procedures. Material and methods: Between July 2011 and March 2014, 18 RALP procedures were performed at our instutition. Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) diagnosis based on clinical presentation and intra- venous urography. All patients underwent basal and diuretic isotopic renography to evaluate the degree of obstruction and impaired renal function. Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty technique was used with a transperitoneal approach by using the da Vinci-S 4-arm surgical robot. Outcomes were assessed retrospectively. Results: Mean patient age was 31.3±11.7 (13-62) years. Male: female ratio was 9: 9. All procedures were primary surgeries. Of 18 patients, 10 (55.5%) had a crossing vessel and 8 (44.5%) had intrinsic obstruction. Mean operative time was 150.4±17.2 (115-185) minutes. Mean anastomosis time was 21.4±5.5 (10-33) min- utes. Mean blood loss during the operation was 33.6±17.3 (10-60) cc. Mean hospital stay was 2.6±1.0 (1-6) days. No conversion to open surgery was required. No intraoperative and perioperative (0-30 days) compli- cation occurred. Readmission rate during perioperative period was 0%. Median follow-up was 16.6±10.3 (3-35) months. Postoperative intravenous urography and renography showed improved results in all cases. Conclusion: Due to our experience, RALP is a safe and feasible minimally invasive approach in patients with UPJO with excellent surgical and functional outcomes.

Özet

Amaç: Robot yardımlı laparoskopik transperitoneal piyeloplasti (RYLTP) ameliyatlarının sonuçlarını sunmayı amaçladık. Gereç ve yöntemler: Kliniğimizde Haziran 2011 ila Mart 2014 tarihleri arasında 18 RYLTP ameliyatı uygulanmıştır. Üreteropelvik bileşke darlığı (ÜPBD) tanısı klinik prezantasyon ve intravenöz ürograf (İVÜ) sonuçlarına göre kondu. Obstrüksiyon derecesini ve bozulmuş renal fonksiyonu değerlendirmek amacıyla, bazal ve diüretikli renogram veya İVÜ tetkikleri yapıldı. Tüm hastalara, da Vinci-S 4-kollu cerrahi robotik sistemi kullanılarak, transperitoneal yaklaşımla Anderson-Hynes dismembered piyeloplasti ameliyatı uygulandı. Sonuçlar retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Hastaların ortalama yaşı 31,3±11,7 (13-62) yıl idi. Erkek: kadın oranı 9: 9 idi. Tüm prosedürler primer vakalara uygulandı. Hastaların 10’unda (%55,5) çaprazlayan damar, 8’inde (%44,5) ise intrinsik obstrüksiyon tespit edildi. Operasyon süresinin ortalaması 150,4±17,2 (115-185) dakika idi. Anastomoz süresinin ortalaması 21,4±5,5 (10-33) dakika olarak tespit edildi. Operasyon sırasındaki ortalama kanama miktarı 33,6±17,3 (10-60) cc idi. Ortalama hastanede kalış süresi 2,6±1,0 (1-6) gün idi. Hiç bir hastada açık cerrahiye dönüş gereksinimi olmadı. Hiç bir hastada intraoperatif ve perioperatif (0-30 gün) komplikasyon gelişmedi. Perioperatif dönemde hastaneye yeniden başvuru oranı %0 idi. Ortalama izlem süresi 16,6±10,3 (3-35) ay idi. Tüm hastaların, postoperatif İVÜ ve diüretikli renogram tetkiklerinde düzelme tespit edildi. Sonuç: Tecrübemize göre, ÜPBD olan hastalarda, RYLTP, mükemmel cerrahi ve fonksiyonel sonuçları olan, güvenli ve uygun bir minimal invaziv yaklaşımdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ENER, K., ALTINOVA, S., CANDA, A. E., ÖZCAN, M. F., ASİL, E., ÜRER, E., ATMACA, A. F., AKBULUT, Z. (2014). Robot yardımlı laparoskopik transperitoneal pyeloplasti sonuçlarımız: On sekiz olguluk seri. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 4, 193–198. https://ajindex.com/articles/328029

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Tripp BM, Homsy YL. Neonatal hydronephrosis-the controversy and the management. Pediatr Nephrol 1995;9:503-9. [CrossRef] 2. Nakada SY, Hsu THS. Management of Upper Urinary Tract Obstruction. editor-in-chief, Wein AJ; editors, Kavoussi LR, Partin AW, Novick AC, Peters CA. Campbell-Walsh Urology, 10th Edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Elsevier; 2012.p.1122-3. 3. Sung GT, Gill IS, Hsu TH. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyelop - lasty: a pilot study. Urology 1999;53:1099-103. [CrossRef] 4. Kaouk JH, Khalifeh A, Hillyer S, Haber GP, Stein RJ, Autorino R. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: step-by-step contemporary technique and surgical outcomes at a single high- volume institution. Eur Urol 2012;62:553-61. [CrossRef] 5. Eden CG. Minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a critical analysis of results. Eur Urol 2007;52:983-9. [CrossRef] 6. Bird VG, Leveillee RJ, Eldefrawy A, Bracho J, Aziz MS. Comparison of robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty for patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a single-center study. Urology 2011;77:730-4. [CrossRef] 7. Schuessler WW, Grune MT, Tecuanhuey LV, Preminger GM. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 1993;150:1795-9. 8. Rassweiler J, Frede T, Henkel TO, Stock C, Alken P. Nephrectomy: A comparative study between the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus the open approach. Eur Urol 1998;33:489-96. [CrossRef] 9. Miyake H, Kawabata G, Gotoh A, Fujisawa M, Okada H, Arakawa S, et al. Comparison of surgical stress between laparoscopy and open surgery in the field of urology by measurement of humoral mediators. Int J Urol 2002;9:329-33. [CrossRef] 10. Canes D, Berger A, Gettman MT, Desai MM. Minimally invasive approaches to ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urol Clin North Am 2008;35:425-39. [CrossRef] 11. Yu HY, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Kowalczyk KJ, Hu JC. Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol 2012;187:1392-8. [CrossRef] 12. Boylu U, Basatac C, Turan T, Onol FF, Gumus E. Comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of minimally invasive and open pyeloplasty. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2012;22:968-71. [CrossRef] 13. Başataç C, Boylu U, Önol FF, Gümüş E. Comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Turkish Journal of Urology 2014;40:2