Journals / Şişli Etfal Hastanesi Tıp Bülteni / 2019 / Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 3

Clavien System Classification of Complications Developed following Laparoscopic Urological Operations Applied in our Clinic

Pages
228–239
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: The data presented here would enable us to compare our complication rates objectively with world literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: We analyzed the complications of laparoscopic surgery using Clavien system classification on 396 urological procedures performed at our institution between 2005-2009.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed, focusing on complications associated with 396 laparoscopic surgeries performed between 2005 and 2009, which included radical and simple nephrectomy (n=188), partial nephrectomy (n=29), pyeloplasty (n=78), sacrocolpopexy (n=16) and radical prostatectomy (n=85).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The data presented here would enable us to compare our complication rates objectively with world literature.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005-2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objectives: We analyzed the complications of laparoscopic surgery using Clavien system classification on 396 urological procedures performed at our institution between 2005-2009. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed, focusing on complications associated with 396 laparoscopic surgeries performed between 2005 and 2009, which included radical and simple nephrectomy (n=188), partial nephrectomy (n=29), pyeloplasty (n=78), sacrocolpopexy (n=16) and radical prostatectomy (n=85). Complication data were tabulated according to the case number, procedure type, patient age, the American Society of Anesthesiologists score (ASA), Clavien classification system and annual complication rate during this study. Statistical analysis was performed with Fisher’s exact and chi-square tests. Results: A total of 75 patients had complications during the study period. Thus, the total postoperative complication rate was 18.9%. When sub-stratified to various surgical procedures, complication rates were: laparoscopic radical and simple nephrectomy (11.1%), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (37.9%), laparoscopic pyeloplasty (15.3%), laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (18.7%) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (32.9%). When the complications were classified according to Clavien Classification System stage 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, complication rate was observed in 11.6%, 13.8%, 1.2%, 1%, and 0% of patients, respectively. A correlation was not identified between ASA score and complication rate (p=0.02). Conclusion: The data presented here would enable us to compare our complication rates objectively with world literature.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİRDAĞ, Ç., ÇİTGEZ, S., ÖBEK, C. (2019). Clavien System Classification of Complications Developed following Laparoscopic Urological Operations Applied in our Clinic. Şişli Etfal Hastanesi Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 3, 228–239. https://ajindex.com/articles/364188

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Cadeddu JA, Wolfe JS Jr, Nakada S, Chen R, Shalhav A, Bishoff JT, et al. Complications of laparoscopic procedures after concentrated training in urological laparoscopy. J Urol 2001;166:2109–11
  2. Parsons JK, Varkarakis I, Rha KH, Jarrett TW, Pinto PA, Kavoussi LR. Complications of abdominal urologic laparoscopy: longitudinal five-yearanalysis. Urology 2004;63:27–32
  3. Baniel J, Foster RS, Rowland RG, Bihrle R, Donohue JP. Complications of primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. J Urol 1994;152:424–7
  4. Gonzalgo ML, Pavlovich CP, Trock BJ, Link RE, Sullivan W, Su LM. Classification and trends of perioperative morbidities following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2005;174:135–9
  5. Clavien PA, Sanabria JR, Strasberg SM. Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utilityin cholecystectomy. Surgery 1992;111:518–26
  6. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205–13
  7. Van Velthoven RF, Ahlering TE, Peltier A, Skarecky DW, Clayman RV. Technique for laparoscopic running urethrovesical anastomosis:the singleknot method. Urology 2003;61:699–702
  8. Matin SF. Laparoscopic approaches to urologic malignancies. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2003;4:373–83
  9. Martin RC 2nd, Brennan MF, Jaques DP. Quality of complication reporting in the surgical literature. Ann Surg 2002;235:803–13
  10. Gomella LG, Abdel-Meguid TA, Lotfi MA, Hirsch IH, Albala D, Manyak M, et al. Laparoscopic urologic surgery outcome assessment. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 1997;7:77–86
  11. Fahlenkamp D, Rassweiler J, Fornara P, Frede T, Loening SA. Complications of laparoscopic procedures in urology: experience with 2,407procedures at 4 German centers. J Urol 1999;162:765–70
  12. Permpongkosol S, Link RE, Su LM, Romero FR, Bagga HS, Pavlovich CP, Jarrett TW, et al. Complications of 2,775 urological laparoscopic procedures: 1993 to 2005. J Urol 2007;177:580–5
  13. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, Dierks SM, Meretyk S, Darcy MD, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1991;146:278–82
  14. Pareek G, Hedican SP, Gee JR, Bruskewitz RC, Nakada SY. Metaanalysis of the complications of laparoscopic renal surgery: comparison of procedures and techniques. J Urol 2006;175:1208–13
  15. Dunn MD, Portis AJ, Shalhav AL, Elbahnasy AM, Heidorn C, McDougall EM, et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy: