首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Urology >Necessity of ureteral catheter during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.
【24h】

Necessity of ureteral catheter during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

机译:腹腔镜部分肾切除术中输尿管导管的必要性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) is a relatively recently introduced method of treating renal tumors and, as such, surgical technique is evolving. In open series urinary fistula formation represents a common postoperative complication. In the laparoscopic approach investigators have advocated the placement of a ureteral catheter with retrograde dye injection to visualize caliceal entry to aid in closure. In this study we assessed the necessity of ureteral catheter placement during LPN in decreasing urinary leakage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From February 1998 until November 2002 laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was performed in 103 patients with renal tumors. The patients were assessed retrospectively and divided into 2 groups according to placement (group 1) or no placement (group 2) of an external ureteral catheter. Group 1 included 54 patients (mean age +/- SD 57.4 +/- 13.4 years) and group 2 included 49 patients (mean age +/- SD 57.5 +/- 10.9). Intraoperative and postoperative parameters including blood loss, operative time, ischemia time, mass size, complications and hospital stay were reviewed and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were no differences between the 2 groups in mean estimated blood loss (group 1, 394.7 cc vs group 2, 291.5 cc, p = 0.07), postoperative serum creatinine (group 1, 0.95 mg/dl vs group 2, 0.89 mg/dl, p = 0.12), requirement for pain medication (group 1, 8.9 mg vs group 2, 4.9 mg morphine equivalents, p = 0.12), hospital stay (group 1, 3.1 vs group 2, 2.9, p = 0.29) and warm ischemia time (group 1, 28 minutes vs group 2, 26.5 minutes, p = 0.18). Mean total operative time was significantly longer for group 1 compared to group 2 (191.1 vs 149.4 minutes, respectively, p = 0.001). Postoperative urinary leakage requiring prolonged drainage occurred in 1 patient in group 1 and 1 in group 2. In both cases caliceal entry was identified and sutured. CONCLUSIONS: With experience caliceal entry can be identified without the need for a ureteral catheter in patients undergoing LPN for a tumor less than 4.5 cm. Urinary fistula may occur despite caliceal entry and repair. A ureteral catheter may not decrease urinary fistula in patients undergoing LPN.
机译:目的:腹腔镜部分肾切除术(LPN)是一种相对较新引入的治疗肾肿瘤的方法,因此,外科手术技术也在不断发展。在开放式系列中,尿瘘形成代表常见的术后并发症。在腹腔镜方法中,研究人员提倡通过逆行注射染料放置输尿管导管,以可视化钙管的进入,从而有助于闭合。在这项研究中,我们评估了LPN期间输尿管导管放置在减少尿液渗漏中的必要性。材料与方法:1998年2月至2002年11月,对103例肾肿瘤患者行腹腔镜部分肾切除术。对患者进行回顾性评估,并根据输尿管外部导管的放置(第1组)或无放置(第2组)分为两组。第1组包括54例患者(平均年龄+/- SD 57.4 +/- 13.4岁),第2组包括49例患者(平均年龄+/- SD 57.5 +/- 10.9)。回顾和比较两组的术中和术后参数,包括失血量,手术时间,缺血时间,肿块大小,并发症和住院时间。结果:两组的平均估计失血量(第1组,394.7 cc与第2组,291.5 cc,p = 0.07),术后血肌酐(第1组,0.95 mg / dl与第2组,0.89 mg)无差异/ dl,p = 0.12),止痛药需求量(第1组,8.9 mg与第2组,4.9 mg吗啡当量,p = 0.12),住院时间(第1,3.1与第2组,2.9,p = 0.29)和温暖的缺血时间(第1组,28分钟vs第2组,26.5分钟,p = 0.18)。与第2组相比,第1组的平均总手术时间明显更长(分别为191.1和149.4分钟,p = 0.001)。第1组的1例患者和第2组的1例患者发生术后尿漏,需要长时间引流。在这两种情况下,均已确定并缝合了大肠小管。结论:根据经验,在接受LPN小于4.5 cm肿瘤的患者中,无需输尿管就可以识别出cal管进入。尽管有钙管进入和修复,但仍可能发生尿瘘。接受LPN的患者中,输尿管导管可能不会减少尿瘘。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号