Nephrectomy: A comparative study between the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus the open approach

被引:102
作者
Rassweiler, J
Frede, T
Henkel, TO
Stock, C
Alken, P
机构
[1] Stadtkrankenhaus Heilbronn, Dept Urol, D-74078 Heilbronn, Germany
[2] Diakonissenkrankenhaus Mannheim, Dept Urol, Mannheim, Germany
[3] Univ Heidelberg, Clin Fac, Sch Med, Klinikum Mannheim,Dept Urol, D-6900 Heidelberg, Germany
关键词
laparoscopic nephrectomy; transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy; retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy; comparison to open nephrectomy; complications; hospital stay;
D O I
10.1159/000019640
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives: Different techniques have been introduced to perform laparoscopic nephrectomy using either the transperitoneal or the retroperitoneal route. However, to date only few data exist comparing the results and morbidity of these procedures as well as with the standard technique of open nephrectomy. Material and Methods: This paper compares the clinical results of 18 transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomies (TLN) for benign renal disease with 17 retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomies (RLN) and 19 consecutive open nephrectomies (Nx). All groups were comparable in terms of indication. The analysis of clinical data included operative time, morbidity, length of analgesic use and postoperative hospital stay. Results: The mean operative time for benign disease was 206.5 for TLN, 211.2 for RLN and 117 min for open nephrectomy. Analgesic medication requirement per patient was 2 days for TLN, 1 day for RLN and 4 days for Nx while the postoperative hospital stay averaged 7 days for TLN, 6 days for RLN and 10 days for Nx. The time of convalescence was 21 days after RLN, 24 days after TLN versus 40 days after open nephrectomy. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate an overall clear advantage of a laparoscopic approach when compared to open surgery and also reveals distinct benefits of a retroperitoneal approach.
引用
收藏
页码:489 / 496
页数:8
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] DEHISCENCE FOLLOWING LAPAROSCOPY - REPORT OF AN UNUSUAL COMPLICATION
    BISHOP, HL
    HALPIN, TF
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1973, 116 (04) : 585 - 586
  • [2] LIVING DONOR NEPHRECTOMY - COMPLICATION RATES IN 490 CONSECUTIVE CASES
    BLOHME, I
    FEHRMAN, I
    NORDEN, G
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 1992, 26 (02): : 149 - 153
  • [3] CLAYMAN R V, 1990, Journal of Endourology, V4, P247, DOI 10.1089/end.1990.4.247
  • [4] Clayman Ralph V., 1994, Journal of Urology, V151, p342A
  • [5] LAPAROSCOPIC NEPHRECTOMY - INITIAL CASE-REPORT
    CLAYMAN, RV
    KAVOUSSI, LR
    SOPER, NJ
    DIERKS, SM
    MERETYK, S
    DARCY, MD
    ROEMER, FD
    PINGLETON, ED
    THOMSON, PG
    LONG, SR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1991, 146 (02) : 278 - 282
  • [6] CLAYMAN RV, 1997, J ENDOUROL, V11, pS45
  • [7] LAPAROSCOPY IN UROLOGY - PERSPECTIVES AND PRACTICE
    COPTCOAT, MJ
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1992, 69 (06): : 561 - 567
  • [8] Coptcoat MJ, 1996, UROLOGE A, V35, P226
  • [9] CRAWFORD ED, 1991, UROLOGIC SURG, P22
  • [10] LAPAROSCOPIC OPERATIVE RETROPERITONEOSCOPY - USE OF A NEW DEVICE
    GAUR, DD
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1992, 148 (04) : 1137 - 1139