后腹腔镜巨大肾积水切除的手术技巧

目的探讨后腹腔镜巨大肾积水无功能肾切除的手术技巧。方法回顾性分析2010年9月至2014年5月采用后腹腔镜切除巨大肾积水无功能肾48例的临床资料。其中男33例,女15例,平均44岁;巨大肾积水的病因包括输尿管结石38例、先天性肾盂输尿管交界处狭窄8例,异位血管压迫引起2例。观察手术时间、术中出血量、住院天数及手术效果。结果 48例手术均获成功,无中转开放手术。术中术后均未出现明显并发症;手术时间40~180 min,平均90 min,术中出血量20~180 ml,平均60 ml,术后住院时间5~8 d。结论后腹腔镜下巨大肾积水的无功能肾切除安全可行,通过一定的手术技巧有助于术中手术操作。     

手助腹腔镜泌尿外科手术26例分析

目的：评价泌尿外科手助腹腔镜手术(HALS)的使用情况。方法：2001年11月～2004年6月，我院施行泌尿外科不同病种的HALS共26例，其中肾癌12例，肾盂癌3例，巨大肾积水4例，亲属供肾5例，巨大肾上腺肿瘤2例。肿瘤直径3～8cm。手术类型为根治性肾切除、肾输尿管切除、肾切除和肾上腺肿瘤切除等。结果：①根治性肾切除平均手术时间120min，术中出血50～100ml。②肾输尿管切除平均手术时间150min，术中出血50～100ml。③亲属供肾切除平均手术时间114min，术中出血50～120ml，热缺血时间3～10min，平均4．4min，1周内血肌酐均恢复正常水平。所有移植肾功能正常，5名受者均不需要血液透析。④巨大肾积水肾切除平均手术时间90min，术中出血30～50ml。⑤巨大肾上腺肿瘤切除平均手术时间130min，术中出血60～120m1。本组术后随访3～28个月，未见肿瘤复发、转移，无一例中转开放手术。术后住院一般在7天之内。手助切口1例感染并延迟愈合。结论：手助腹腔镜手术可以缩短手术时间，降低手术的危险性，使已有腹腔镜技术基础的泌尿外科医生迅速开展各类手术，亦使某些单纯腹腔镜技术难以完成的复杂手术得以完成。     

后腹腔镜结核肾切除术12例报告

目的了解后腹腔镜结核肾切除的应用价值。方法选取2005年1月~2008年12月进行的12例后腹腔镜结核肾切除术及12例开放性结核肾切除术病例,比较两组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院天数及术后切口愈合情况。结果 12例后腹腔镜手术有11例顺利完成,1例转为开放手术。两组的平均手术时间无明显差异（后腹腔镜组平均134 min,开放手术组平均120 min,P〉0.05）,但后腹腔镜组的术中平均出血量、术后住院天数明显小于开放手术组,切口愈合情况较开放手术组更好（出血量后腹腔镜组平均110 mL,开放手术组平均130 mL,P〈0.05;术后住院天数后腹腔镜组平均8 d,开放手术组平均10.8 d,P〈0.05）。结论后腹腔镜结核肾切除术适应证与开放性结核肾切除术类似,同时具有出血少、术后住院时间短、切口愈合更好的优点,值得广泛应用。     

腹腔镜与开放肾切除术的对比研究

目的:探讨非肿瘤性无功能肾患者行腹腔镜肾切除术的可行性,并与开放手术进行对比研究。方法:1997年8月至2007年10月我们为85例患者行单纯性肾切除术,其中腹腔镜手术32例(23例经侧腹腔途径,9例经腹膜后途经),开放性手术53例。比较两种方法的手术时间,出血量,术后引流量、胃肠功能恢复时间、下床活动时间、住院天数,住院总费用及止痛药的应用等指标。结果:85例手术均获成功,无术中及术后严重并发症发生。腹腔镜手术组无中转开放者。腹腔镜手术组术中出血量,术后胃肠功能恢复时间、引流量、下床活动时间、住院天数及止痛药应用等指标均低于开放手术组(P<0.05),手术时间及住院总费用则高于开放手术组(P<0.05)。结论:与开放手术相比,腹腔镜单纯性肾切除术具有患者出血少、创伤轻、康复快等优点,适于多种非肿瘤性无功能肾的切除。随着术者经验的积累、操作技术水平的提高以及腹腔镜技术的发展,腹腔镜手术的操作时间及患者的住院费用可接近开放手术。     

巨大肾积水后腹腔镜切除术20例临床分析

目的分析微创方法治疗巨大积水无功能肾的临床效果。方法回顾性分析20例后腹腔镜超声刀积水无功能肾切除患者临床资料,其中左侧12例,右侧8例;14例为肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻,4例为输尿管上段结石,2例为异位血管压迫引起。结果19例患者应用以上方法获得成功,术中、术后均未输血,平均手术时间120（90~160）min,术中平均出血约45（20～120）mL。1例因肾积水合并感染粘连中转开放。结论巨大肾积水后腹腔镜肾切除术安全可靠、微创、恢复快、没有污染腹腔的危险,但对于合并感染而引起周围粘连者则应慎重应用。     

简易手助腹腔镜下肾及肾上腺切除术(附37例报告)

目的　介绍简易手助腹腔镜下肾及肾上腺肿瘤切除术的方法和特点。　方法　 1999年 6月至 2 0 0 4年 4月采用简易手助装置实施手助腹腔镜下肾及肾上腺肿瘤切除术 ,共 37例。男 2 2例 ,女 15例 ,平均年龄 5 2岁。肾切除组 2 9例 ,其中肾癌 13例 ,肾盂癌 2例 ,肿瘤分期均为T1N0 M0 ,肿瘤大小平均 3cm× 3cm× 2cm ,巨大肾积水 (肾无功能 ) 8例 ,肾结核肾自截 2例 ,肾性高血压肾萎缩 4例 ;肾上腺肿瘤切除组 8例 ,肿瘤大小平均 4cm× 5cm× 6cm。　结果　除 1例肾癌患者改行开放手术外 ,36例患者手术成功 ,无损伤肠管及其他腹内重要脏器等并发症。肾切除术平均手术时间 14 5min ,平均出血量 115ml;肾上腺肿瘤切除术平均 12 5min ,平均出血量 10 5ml。术后恢复好 ,7～ 8d出院。术后随访 3个月～ 5年 ,健康存活 35例 ;死亡 2例 ,均为肾癌患者 ,其中 1例术后 2年死于脑血管意外 ,1例术后 3年死于肺及脑部转移。　结论　简易手助腹腔镜下肾及肾上腺肿瘤切除术具有简便易行、节省费用、手术时间短、术后恢复快等优点 ,值得推广。     

腹腔镜肾切除病人围手术期护理

对 2 3例采用腹腔镜手术的肾肿瘤病人进行针对性的护理 ,并与 19例开放性手术病人进行比较 ,观察两组术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、术后下床活动时间、拔除引流管时间、术后输液天数、术后住院天数、住院总天数。结果腹腔镜手术组各项指标均优于开放性手术组 (P <0 .0 5 ,P <0 .0 1)。应用腹腔镜行肾切除手术 ,病人创伤小、恢复快 ,有效减少了护理工作量。     

后腹腔镜手术切除结核性无功能肾与开放手术的临床比较

目的：探讨后腹腔镜手术切除结核性无功能肾的安全性与疗效。方法：将36例结核性无功能肾患者,按手术方式分为后腹腔镜组和开放手术组,比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、并发症等方面的差异。结果：后腹腔镜组手术中转开放手术2例,开放手术组手术均获成功;后腹腔镜组肠功能恢复时间平均2．10天。显著少于开放手术组2．79天（P〈0．05）;镇痛剂使用平均0．71次,显著少于开放手术组1．87次（P〈0．05）。结论：后腹腔镜手术切除结核性无功能肾创伤小,恢复快,有学习曲线,安全可行。     

后腹腔镜根治性肾切除术与开放手术治疗局限性肾癌的疗效比较

目的比较后腹腔镜根治性肾切除术与开放手术治疗局限性肾癌的临床效果。方法回顾性分析我院2006年1月～2009年1月行后腹腔镜根治性。肾切除术（后腹腔镜组）42例与开放根治性肾切除术（开放手术组）45例的临床资料,比较两种手术方法在手术时间、术中出血量、术后肠道恢复时间、术后住院时间、并发症等方面的差异。结果两组手术均获成功。后腹腔镜组的术中出血量、术后肠道恢复时间、术后住院时间等均明显少于开放手术组（P〈0．05）,而手术时间两组差异无统计学意义。两组均无严重并发症发生,开放手术组2例输血。术后随访3～26个月,平均9个月,后腹腔镜组1例发生肝转移死亡,开放手术组2例出现远处转移而死亡。结论与开放手术相比,后腹腔镜根治性肾切除术具有创伤小、术后恢复快、并发症少等优点,是治疗T1～2 N0M0局限性肾癌患者的一种安全、有效的方法。     

基于Orem自理模式的腹腔镜与开放肾切除手术的临床比较

目的 比较基于Orem自理模式的腹腔镜与开放肾切除手术的临床效果. 方法 运用Orem自理模式的三个护理系统对手术治疗的47例肾细胞癌患者实施护理,其中腹腔镜肾切除手术组24例.开放肾切除手术组23例.比较两组患者临床指标. 结果 腹腔镜组除手术时间长于开放组(P相似文献   

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy. METHODS: From June 1994 to November 1999, 10 patients underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy at Osaka University Medical Hospital and Osaka Rosai Hospital. Laparoscopic nephrectomy was performed either via transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach under general anesthesia. These 10 cases were reviewed in respect of primary disease of the kidney, operative time, complications and postoperative convalescence. RESULTS: Of the 10 patients, five were preoperatively diagnosed as having a non-functioning kidney with hydronephrosis, two patients were diagnosed as having an atrophic kidney, two had renal cell carcinoma and one had renal pelvic tumor. The average operative time was 374 min (range 270-675 min). The mean blood loss was 330 mL (range 60-800 mL). One patient required transfusion due to postoperative oozing. The average hospital stay after operation was 7 days. No major postoperative complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic nephrectomy is an option in surgically managing renal disorders, including malignancies, although it has a longer operative time compared to conventional open surgery.     

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: the Cleveland clinic experience

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is usually performed by the transperitoneal approach. At our institution the retroperitoneoscopic approach is preferred. We confirm the technical feasibility of retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy, even for large specimens, and compare its results with open surgery in a contemporary cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 patients underwent 53 retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomies. Data from the most recent 34 laparoscopic cases were retrospectively compared with 34 contemporary cases treated with open radical nephrectomy. RESULTS: For the 53 retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomies mean tumor size was 4.6 cm. (range 2 to 12), surgical time was 2.9 hours (range 1.2 to 4.5) and blood loss was 128 cc. Mean specimen weight was 484 gm. (range 52 to 1,328), and concomitant adrenalectomy was performed in 72% of patients. Mean analgesic requirement was 31 mg. morphine sulfate equivalent. Average hospital stay was 1.6 days, with 68% of patients discharged from the hospital within 23 hours of the procedure. Minor complications occurred in 8 patients (17%) and major complications occurred in 2 (4%) who required conversion to open surgery. Various parameters, including patient age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, tumor size (5 versus 6.1 cm.), specimen weight (605 versus 638 gm.) and surgical time (3.1 versus 3.1 hours), were comparable between patients undergoing laparoscopic (34) and open (34) radical nephrectomy. However, laparoscopy resulted in decreased blood loss (p <0.001), hospital stay (p <0.001), analgesic requirements (p <0.001) and convalescence (p = 0.005). Complications occurred in 13% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 24% in the open group. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneoscopy is a reliable, effective and, in our hands, the preferred technique of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. At our institution retroperitoneoscopy has emerged as an attractive alternative to open radical nephrectomy in patients with T1-T2N0M0 renal tumors.     

Outcome of retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for benign nonfunctioning kidney: a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the feasibility and outcome of retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for benign nonfunctioning kidneys and compare it with open simple nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1998 to December 2006, 505 retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomies were performed. In the same time period, 112 open nephrectomies were also performed. In the retroperitoneoscopic group, the mean age was 39 years (range 15-74 years); 204 (40.4%) were men and 301 (59.6%) were women. Forty in this group had a history of surgery. Thirty-six patients had a pyonephrotic kidney; 33 of these patients had undergone percutaneous nephrostomy preoperatively. The cause of the nonfunctioning kidney was ureteropelvic junction obstruction in 198 patients, calculus disease in 193 patients, genitourinary tuberculosis in 48 patients, renal dysplasia in 19 patients, anomalous kidney in 20 patients, and renovascular hypertension in 16 patients. In 11 patients, there were other causes for the nonfunctioning kidney. RESULTS: Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy was performed in 476 (94.2%) patients. Conversion to open nephrectomy was necessary in 25 patients. The mean operative time was 85 minutes (range 45-240 min) in the retroperitoneoscopic group and 70 minutes (range 35-120 min) in the open group. The mean blood loss was 110 mL (range 30-600 mL) in the retroperitoneoscopic group and 170 mL (range 70-500 mL) in the open group. Four (0.8%) patients in the retroperitoneoscopic group needed a blood transfusion, whereas 5 (4.5%) patients in the open group had a blood transfusion. The hospital stay in the retroperitoneoscopic group was 3 days (range 1-7 d) and was 5 days (range 3-12 d) in the open group. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy, although technically challenging, is becoming a gold standard for patients with nonfunctioning kidneys caused by benign conditions.     

后腹腔镜与开放手术行肾部分切除术治疗肾肿瘤的临床效果比较

目的：通过与开放性肾部分切除术（OPN）的临床效果比较,评价后腹腔镜肾部分切除术（LPN）的临床价值。方法：回顾性分析后腹腔镜肾部分切除术（38例,LPN手术组）和同期施行开放性肾部分切除术（46例,OPN手术组）的临床资料,就两组患者一般资料、手术时间、患肾热缺血时间、术中出血量、术后肠道功能恢复时间、术后止痛药用量、术后住院天数、术后血清肌酐升高幅度及术后并发症等指标进行比较。根据数据类型选用x2检验、两样本t检验或Wilcoxon秩和检验,以P〈0．05为差异有统计学意义。结果：两组患者的一般资料差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,具有可比性。LPN手术组在术中出血量、术后肠道功能恢复时间、术后止痛药用量、术后住院天数方面及术后并发症发生率均优于DPN手术组（P〈0．05）,但前者的患肾热缺血时间明显长于后者（P〈0．05）。LPN手术组和OPN手术组的手术时间及术后血清肌酐升高幅度差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组患者送检标本的手术切缘均为阴性,随访18个月均无一例复发。结论：后腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗肾肿瘤疗效肯定,与传统的开放性肾部分切除术相比,具有创伤小、恢复快、疗效与开放性手术相当等优点,是目前治疗肾肿瘤较理想的手术方法,值得进一步推广。     

Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is an increasingly performed, minimally invasive alternative to open partial nephrectomy. We compared early postoperative outcomes in 1,800 patients undergoing open partial nephrectomy by experienced surgeons with the initial experience with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in patients with a single renal tumor 7 cm or less. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on 1,800 consecutive open or laparoscopic partial nephrectomies were collected prospectively or retrospectively in tumor registries at 3 large referral centers. Demographic, intraoperative, postoperative and followup data were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Compared to the laparoscopic partial nephrectomy group of 771 patients the 1,028 undergoing open partial nephrectomy were a higher risk group with a greater percent presenting symptomatically with decreased performance status, impaired renal function and tumor in a solitary functioning kidney (p<0.0001). More tumors in the open partial nephrectomy group were more than 4 cm and centrally located and more proved to be malignant (p<0.0001 and 0.0003, respectively). Based on multivariate analysis laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was associated with shorter operative time (p<0.0001), decreased operative blood loss (p<0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001). The chance of intraoperative complications was comparable in the 2 groups. However, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was associated with longer ischemia time (p<0.0001), more postoperative complications, particularly urological (p<0.0001), and an increased number of subsequent procedures (p<0.0001). Renal functional outcomes were similar 3 months after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy with 97.9% and 99.6% of renal units retaining function, respectively. Three-year cancer specific survival for patients with a single cT1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma was 99.3% and 99.2% after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early experience with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is promising. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy offered the advantages of less operative time, decreased operative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. When applied to patients with a single renal tumor 7 cm or less, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was associated with additional postoperative morbidity compared to open partial nephrectomy. However, equivalent functional and early oncological outcomes were achieved.     

Retroperitoneoscopic pre-transplant native kidney nephrectomy

AIMS: Laparoscopic nephrectomy has become a standardized procedure for removal of benign non-functioning kidneys. We present our experience of retroperitoneoscopic pre-transplant native kidneys nephrectomy. METHODS: Comparison of 40 patients who underwent retroperitoneoscopy with 40 open simple pre-transplant nephrectomy patients was done. RESULTS: Forty retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomies were done between June 2003 and April 2005. The mean operative time was similar in the two groups; however, the mean blood loss, postoperative analgesic requirement, complication rate, hospital stay and convalescence period were significantly less in the retroperitoneoscopic group. CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy should be offered as the primary treatment modality to patients requiring pre-transplant native kidney nephrectomy, except in patients where it is contraindicated.     

Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for pyonephrotic kidneys

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility and efficacy of retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for pyonephrotic kidneys. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From July 2003 to December 2005, 67 patients underwent retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for nonfunctioning pyonephrotic kidneys. The patients were assessed for operative time, blood loss, analgesic requirement, conversion rate, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy could be accomplished in 58 patients (86.5%). The mean operative time and blood loss were 168 minutes and 101 mL, respectively. The mean postoperative analgesic requirement was 100 mg of diclofenac sodium. The mean hospital stay was 3.4 days. CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy can be accomplished successfully and safely in the majority of patients with pyonephrosis and may be considered as the primary treatment. However, this is a difficult procedure, and experience in routine retroperitoneal nephrectomy is recommended prior to doing a case.     

后腹腔镜与开放肾癌根治性手术的回顾性比较

目的回顾性比较后腹腔镜下肾癌根治术与开放性肾癌根治术的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析68例后腹腔镜肾癌根治性手术及52例开放肾癌根治性手术患者的临床资料，比较两种术式在手术时间、术中估计出血量、术后镇痛药物使用剂量、胃肠道功能恢复时间、下床活动时间及术后住院时间等方面的差异。结果后腹腔镜组与开放手术组患者在性别、年龄、肿瘤位置、肿瘤大小及肿瘤分级上的差别无统计学意义。所有手术均获成功，均未输血。后腹腔镜组平均手术时间（138．4±36．2）min较开放组手术时间（112．3±32．5）min长，但二者之间差异无统计学意义。开放组术中估计出血量（298．1±19．5）ml，后腹腔镜组估计出血量（123．6±24．6）ml，二者差异有统计学意义。后腹腔镜组在镇痛药用量、胃肠道功能恢复时间、下床活动时间及术后住院日等方面均明显优于开放组（P〈0．05）。术后随访3个月至3年，两组均无肿瘤复发，未见操作通道部位或后腹腔内种植。结论与传统开放手术相比，后腹腔镜肾癌根治性手术具有出血少、创伤小、患者痛苦少、恢复快、住院时间短等特点。     

结核性无功能肾的腹腔镜切除(附9例报告)

目的探讨后腹腔镜切除无功能结核肾的应用价值。方法我院2003年10月-2006年11月为9例肾结核行后腹腔镜下结核肾包膜外切除术。用超声刀游离肾脏与输尿管，Endo-GIA或Hem-o-10k阻断肾蒂，把肾放入肾袋后取出。结果9例均成功完成单纯肾切除。无一例中转开放手术，手术时间90—180min，平均110min。术中失血量20—200ml，平均94．4ml。术后住院时间3—8d，平均5．5d。术中1例肾包膜撕破造成少量干酪样脓液外渗，腹膜损伤1例。切口一期愈合。9例随访1—38个月，平均22个月，对侧肾功能正常。结论后腹腔镜结核肾切除术创伤小、出血少、恢复快，对于无功能结核肾是一种比较安全、可靠的手术方法。