Journals / Annals of Medical Research / 2019 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 12

Robot assisted partial nephrectomy: Single center our experiences

Pages
2763–2766
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

RAPN is an effective, safe and minimally invasive treatment modality in patients eligible for partial nephrectomy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: In this study, we aimed to present the functional and oncologic results of robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in clinicalstage T1 tumors.Material and Methods: Fifteen patients who had undergone RAPN for T1a-b kidney tumor between July 2017 and January 2019were included in the study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The demographic data, mean operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of warm ischemia, length ofhospital stay and oncologic results were evaluated retrospectively.Results: Ten male and five female patients with a mean age of 55.4±7.6 (48-71) years were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:RAPN is an effective, safe and minimally invasive treatment modality in patients eligible for partial nephrectomy.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: In this study, we aimed to present the functional and oncologic results of robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in clinicalstage T1 tumors.Material and Methods: Fifteen patients who had undergone RAPN for T1a-b kidney tumor between July 2017 and January 2019were included in the study. The demographic data, mean operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of warm ischemia, length ofhospital stay and oncologic results were evaluated retrospectively.Results: Ten male and five female patients with a mean age of 55.4±7.6 (48-71) years were included in the study. A 4-port transperitoneal approach was applied to all the patients. Nine right and six left renal masses with a mean tm diameter of 2.8±0.4 (2.4-3.6)cm were operated. The mean operation time was 217 (185-250) minutes, the mean blood loss was 225.6 (180-265) cc. Bleedingrequiring transfusion was seen in one patient and a spontaneously resolved ileus was seen in another patient. Urethral stents wereplaced into two patients because the collector system was opened. 8 (53%) of renal masses were reported as renal cell carcinoma.Surgical margin positivity was identified in 2 (13%) of the patients. No local recurrence or distant metastasis was observed in any ofthe patients. None of the patients experienced incisional hernia and late complications.Conclusion: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy is presently the gold standard treatment for patients with clinical stage T1 renaltumor. RAPN is an effective, safe and minimally invasive treatment modality in patients eligible for partial nephrectomy.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARABULUT, İ., YILMAZEL, F. K., YILMAZ, A. H., CEYLAN, O. (2022). Robot assisted partial nephrectomy: Single center our experiences. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 12, 2763–2766. https://ajindex.com/articles/447151

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Gültekin M, Boztaş G. Türkiye kanser istatistikleri. Sağlık Bakanlığı, Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu 2014; Ankara s:43
  2. Chawla SN, Crispen PL, Hanlon AL, et al. The natural history of observed enhancing renal masses: Metaanalysis and review of the world literature. The J Urology 2006;175:425-31
  3. Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Lane BR, et al. Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors. The J Urology 2007;178:41-6
  4. Weight CJ, Lieser G, Larson BT, et al. Partial nephrectomy is associated with improved overall survival compared to radical nephrectomy in patients with unanticipated benign renal tumours. European Urology 2010;58:293-8
  5. Mitchell RE, Gilbert SM, Murphy AM, et al. Partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy offer similar cancer outcomes in renal cortical tumors 4 cm or larger. Urology 2006;67:260-4
  6. Winfield HN, Donovan Jf, Godet AS, et al. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: initial case report for benign disease. J Endourol 1993;7:521-6
  7. Gettman MT, Blute ML, Chow GK, et al. Roboticassisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy:technique and initial clinical experience with daVinci rocotic system. Urology 2004;64:914-8
  8. Tan HJ, Norton EC, Ye Z, et al. Long-term survival following partial vs radical nephrec¬tomy among older patients with early-stage kidney cancer. JAMA 2012;307:1629-35
  9. Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Bensalah K, et al. EAU Guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. European Association of Urology 2017. Update March
  10. Marszalek M, Meixl H, Polajnar M, et al. Laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy: A matched-pair comparison of 200 patients. Eur Urol 2009;55:1171-8
  11. Peycelon M, Hupertan V, Comperat E, et al. Long-term outcomes after neph¬ron sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma larger than 4 cm. J Urol 2009;181:35- 41
  12. Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Lane BR, et al. Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors. J Urol 2007;178:41-6
  13. Delakas D, Karyotis I, Daskalopoulos G, et al. Nephronsparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma with a normal contrala¬teral kidney: A European threecenter experience. Urology 2002;60:998-1002
  14. Weight CJ, Larson BT, Gao T, et al. Elective partial nephrectomy in patients with clinical T1b renal tumors is associated with improved ove¬rall survival. Urology 2010;76:631-7
  15. Kim SP, Thompson RH, Boorjian SA, et al. Comparative effectiveness for survival and renal function of partial and radical nephre