Cargando…

Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy

PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility and safety of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN), we compared the operative outcomes of patients who had undergone RPN with those of patients who had undergone laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2009 and June 2010, 13...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seo, Ill Young, Choi, Hoon, Boldbaatr, Yanjmaa, Lee, Jea Whan, Rim, Joung Sik
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Urological Association 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3085622/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21556216
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2011.52.4.279
_version_ 1782202646384345088
author Seo, Ill Young
Choi, Hoon
Boldbaatr, Yanjmaa
Lee, Jea Whan
Rim, Joung Sik
author_facet Seo, Ill Young
Choi, Hoon
Boldbaatr, Yanjmaa
Lee, Jea Whan
Rim, Joung Sik
author_sort Seo, Ill Young
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility and safety of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN), we compared the operative outcomes of patients who had undergone RPN with those of patients who had undergone laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2009 and June 2010, 13 patients underwent transperitoneal RPN (group 1) and 14 patients underwent transperitoneal LPN (group 2) by a single surgeon. The operative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared by using Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: All cases were completed successfully without conversion to open surgery. The mean operative time was 153.2±22.3 and 117.5±32.0 minutes in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=0.003). The mean robotic console time of group 1 was 101.2±21.5 minutes, and the mean laparoscopic time of group 2 was 86.8±32.3 minutes (p=0.139). The mean warm ischemic time was 35.3±8.5 minutes and 36.4±6.8 minutes in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=0.823). The mean estimated blood loss was 283.6±113.5 ml and 264.1±163.7 ml (p=0.382), respectively. The mean length of hospital stay was 6.1 and 5.3 days (p=0.290), respectively. The mean tumor size was 2.7±1.2 cm and 2.0±1.2 cm (p=0.035), respectively. The surgical margins were negative in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although the operative time of RPN was longer than that of LPN, there were no significant differences in operative outcomes including robotic console time and laparoscopic time between the procedures.
format Text
id pubmed-3085622
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher The Korean Urological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30856222011-05-09 Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy Seo, Ill Young Choi, Hoon Boldbaatr, Yanjmaa Lee, Jea Whan Rim, Joung Sik Korean J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility and safety of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN), we compared the operative outcomes of patients who had undergone RPN with those of patients who had undergone laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2009 and June 2010, 13 patients underwent transperitoneal RPN (group 1) and 14 patients underwent transperitoneal LPN (group 2) by a single surgeon. The operative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared by using Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: All cases were completed successfully without conversion to open surgery. The mean operative time was 153.2±22.3 and 117.5±32.0 minutes in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=0.003). The mean robotic console time of group 1 was 101.2±21.5 minutes, and the mean laparoscopic time of group 2 was 86.8±32.3 minutes (p=0.139). The mean warm ischemic time was 35.3±8.5 minutes and 36.4±6.8 minutes in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=0.823). The mean estimated blood loss was 283.6±113.5 ml and 264.1±163.7 ml (p=0.382), respectively. The mean length of hospital stay was 6.1 and 5.3 days (p=0.290), respectively. The mean tumor size was 2.7±1.2 cm and 2.0±1.2 cm (p=0.035), respectively. The surgical margins were negative in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although the operative time of RPN was longer than that of LPN, there were no significant differences in operative outcomes including robotic console time and laparoscopic time between the procedures. The Korean Urological Association 2011-04 2011-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC3085622/ /pubmed/21556216 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2011.52.4.279 Text en © The Korean Urological Association, 2011 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Seo, Ill Young
Choi, Hoon
Boldbaatr, Yanjmaa
Lee, Jea Whan
Rim, Joung Sik
Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
title Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
title_full Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
title_fullStr Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
title_full_unstemmed Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
title_short Operative Outcomes of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
title_sort operative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy: a comparison with conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3085622/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21556216
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2011.52.4.279
work_keys_str_mv AT seoillyoung operativeoutcomesofroboticpartialnephrectomyacomparisonwithconventionallaparoscopicpartialnephrectomy
AT choihoon operativeoutcomesofroboticpartialnephrectomyacomparisonwithconventionallaparoscopicpartialnephrectomy
AT boldbaatryanjmaa operativeoutcomesofroboticpartialnephrectomyacomparisonwithconventionallaparoscopicpartialnephrectomy
AT leejeawhan operativeoutcomesofroboticpartialnephrectomyacomparisonwithconventionallaparoscopicpartialnephrectomy
AT rimjoungsik operativeoutcomesofroboticpartialnephrectomyacomparisonwithconventionallaparoscopicpartialnephrectomy