改良腹膜后淋巴结清扫术在机器人辅助腹腔镜肾盂癌根治术中的应用

目的探讨机器人辅助腹腔镜改良腹膜后淋巴结清扫术在治疗肾盂和上段输尿管肿瘤患者中的手术技巧, 总结短期疗效。方法回顾性分析2019年1月至2022年1月由南京医科大学第一附属医院收治的22例高危肾盂和(或)上段输尿管肿瘤患者的临床资料, 患者均接受机器人辅助腹腔镜肾盂癌根治术+改良腹膜后淋巴结清扫术治疗。左侧清扫范围包括肾门、腹主动脉表面、腹主动脉旁淋巴结, 右侧包括肾门、下腔静脉表面、下腔静脉旁、下腔静脉后、腹主动脉下腔静脉间淋巴结。结果患者手术时间为(138±14)min, 清扫淋巴结(14.0±4.5)枚, 18.2%(4/22)的患者为淋巴结阳性。随访(14.3±6.3)个月, 其中2例患者出现膀胱内肿瘤复发, 1例淋巴结转移患者死于肺转移。结论机器人辅助腹腔镜改良腹膜后淋巴结清扫术安全可行, 对显露肾门、下腔静脉后方、腹主动脉下腔静脉间淋巴结的效果令人满意。     

经改良腹膜后径路腹腔镜下腹膜后淋巴结清扫术：附9例报告

目的探讨腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的临床可行性,并总结手术技巧。方法对9例睾丸非精原细胞瘤型生殖细胞瘤患者,行根治性睾丸切除术后平均27d行改良腹膜后径路腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术。结果 9例手术均获成功,术中发生下腔静脉损伤1例,腹腔镜下缝合。平均手术时间170min,平均出血量330ml,术后肠功能恢复时间约2d,引流管均于术后第3天拔除,平均住院时间7d。术后随访分别为18±8个月,无复发及转移。结论经改良腹膜后径路行腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫可避免对腹腔脏器的影响,解剖结构显露较满意,具有创伤小、恢复快等优点,是一种临床可进一步应用的手术方式。     

经腹膜外入路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术（附1例报告）

目的探讨经腹膜外入路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的可行性。方法 2010年9月,对1例睾丸非精原细胞瘤行右侧睾丸根治性切除术,术后20 d行经腹膜外入路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术。采用右侧下腹部腹直肌外侧缘纵行切口,置入＂两环一套法＂自制开口器建立单孔腹腔镜通道。手术步骤及清扫范围同开放保留神经的腹膜后淋巴结清扫手术范围。结果手术顺利,手术时间270 min,术中出血量为100 ml,无须输血。无围手术期死亡及严重并发症发生。术后病理：2/11淋巴结为阳性。术后2 d肠蠕动恢复,4 d拔除腹膜后引流管,10 d出院。术后6个月随访,AFP降至正常（2.82μg/L）,未发现肿瘤复发和远处转移,患者对切口美容效果表示满意。结论经腹膜外入路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术可行,美容效果较好,短期随访显示肿瘤控制及性功能恢复好。     

经腹膜外人路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术(附1例报告)

目的 探讨经腹膜外入路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的可行性. 方法 2010年9月,对1例睾丸非精原细胞瘤行右侧睾丸根治性切除术,术后20 d行经腹膜外人路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术.采用右侧下腹部腹直肌外侧缘纵行切口,置人“两环一套法”自制开口器建立单孔腹腔镜通道.手术步骤及清扫范围同开放保留神经的腹膜后淋巴结清扫手术范围. 结果 手术顺利,手术时间270 min,术中出血量为100 ml,无须输血.无围手术期死亡及严重并发症发生.术后病理:2/11淋巴结为阳性.术后2d肠蠕动恢复,4d拔除腹膜后引流管,10 d出院.术后6个月随访,AFP降至正常(2.82 μg/L),未发现肿瘤复发和远处转移,患者对切口美容效果表示满意. 结论 经腹膜外人路单一部位腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术可行,美容效果较好,短期随访显示肿瘤控制及性功能恢复好.     

食管癌术中用达芬奇机器人游离胃的临床经验

目的：探讨在食管癌根治术中利用达芬奇（da Vinci）S机器人游离胃的可行性。方法：2009年8月在1例食管癌根治术中应用da Vinci S机器人游离胃。脐孔上缘建立气腹,穿刺Trocar,置入内窥镜成像系统作为观察孔。于左侧腋前线肋缘下2cm、右锁骨中线平脐上2cm、左锁骨中线平脐上2cm及右腋前线肋缘下2cm处穿刺Trocar作为机械臂和辅助操作孔。机器人完全游离胃后拉入胸腔,做胃管,切除食管大部,于奇静脉上方行食管胃侧侧吻合术。结果：机器人胃游离术成功,机器人手术时间270min。术中出血500ml。术后病理为鳞状细胞癌,共清扫淋巴结24枚,TNM分期为T3N0M0。随访3个月,无肿瘤复发、转移。结论：在食管癌根治术中用机器人游离胃安全可行。     

后腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术17例报道

目的初步探讨后腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术对Ⅰ期睾丸非精原细胞瘤患者的控瘤效果、并发症及安全性。 方法回顾性分析我科2009年4月到2015年5月收治17例临床Ⅰ期睾丸非精原细胞瘤患者的临床资料，行根治性睾丸切除术后，经4通道按Innsbruck大学的改良模板行后腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术。观察手术时间、术中出血量、术中术后并发症、术后恢复情况及所清除淋巴结病理结果，随访控瘤及保留性功能效果。 结果17例手术均成功完成，手术早期腹膜损伤后暴露不佳１例。手术时间平均为220 min（150～310 min），术中出血平均为150 ml（50～260 ml）。术中腰静脉损伤出血2例，均在镜下成功止血。术后24～48 h恢复肠道通气，术后4～7 d拔除引流管，无严重术后并发症。病理提示：淋巴结阳性率为11.8%（2/17），淋巴结阳性患者予术后辅助化疗2个疗程。随访６个月14例可顺行射精，复查肺部和腹膜后CT及肿瘤标志物检查未显示异常。 结论后腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术安全，控瘤效果好，术后并发症少、恢复快，但对术者技术要求较高。     

睾丸肿瘤腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术3例报道及文献复习

目的结合病例及文献探讨在睾丸肿瘤的治疗中应用腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的临床可行性和手术技巧。方法 2005~2012年间行腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的3例睾丸肿瘤病例,年龄22~29岁,左侧2例,右侧1例;经睾丸根治性切除术后病理诊断为混合型生殖细胞肿瘤,包括胚胎性癌(2/3)。同时文献复习中国睾丸肿瘤腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫术的相关报道。结果3例患者手术时间分别为4、7和5h;无严重并发症,1例在术后1周出现短暂的淋巴漏,引流3日后拔引流管出院;1例术后1周出现发热和右上腹痛,CT发现左侧腹膜后有一8cm×7cm×8cm的肿块,在CT引导下进行介入穿刺引流800mL淋巴液后,痊愈出院。淋巴结清扫的数量分别是25、38和18个,未见转移。术后2例患者的血甲胎蛋白(AFP)、人绒毛膜促性腺激素(HCG)和乳酸脱氢酶(LDH)恢复到正常范围,1例患者术后AFP仍停留在较高水平,术后2月行全身化疗2个疗程,化疗结束后复查AFP回归正常。结论腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清扫是一种较为复杂和有一定风险的手术,手术时间较长,需要一定的手术经验和技巧。术后并发症需要十分注意,化疗后手术有待探讨。     

机器人辅助根治性膀胱前列腺切除术+原位双U形回肠代膀胱术

目的探讨da-Vinci机器人辅助腹腔镜下行根治性膀胱前列腺切除术的可行性和疗效。方法患者男性,64岁,膀胱镜检膀胱内多发性占位,CT检查无远处转移。手术采用3臂2辅助孔,da-Vinci机器人辅助腹腔镜下全膀胱切除＋前列腺切除,盆腔淋巴结清扫,体外开放手术下取出切除的膀胱、前列腺,原位双U形回肠代膀胱术。观察手术时间、术中失血量、术后肠道功能恢复、术后并发症及手术效果。结果手术时间330min（包括体位摆放及da-Vinci机器人到位30min）,其中全膀胱切除180min,原位膀胱术120min。手术失血量800ml,输红细胞600ml,血浆300ml。术后病理：膀胱尿路上皮癌。术后第10天拔除双侧输尿导管,术后3周拔除导尿管,未发生手术并发症及术后并发症,尿控良好。结论 da-Vinci机器人辅助腹腔镜下根治性膀胱前列腺切除术可以明显减少术中出血,恢复快,缩短住院时间。机器人将复杂的盆腔腹腔镜手术变得简单易行,提高了手术的精细度和灵巧性。     

机器人辅助腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术加扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗局部进展期前列腺癌的回顾性临床分析

目的:评估机器人辅助腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术加扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫术治疗局部进展期前列腺癌的安全性及其疗效.方法:回顾性分析2015年12月-2019年12月我院收治的112例局部进展期前列腺癌患者的临床资料,放射性核素骨扫描排除骨转移后,行机器人辅助腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术加扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫术,统计患者手术时间、术中出血...     

手助腹腔镜直肠癌前切除术28例

目的 探讨手助腹腔镜下直肠癌前切除术的临床效果。方法 对应用手助腹腔镜方式进行前切除术的28例直肠癌患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果 手术全部成功，无并发症和中转开腹手术者。病理检查显示淋巴结清扫及手术切除范围满意。术后患者疼痛轻，肠功能恢复早；术后排便、排气时间平均为32h；术后平均住院天数为7d。全组病例均获随诊(时间为8～19个月)，无肿瘤复发和操作孔种植。结论 手辅助腹腔镜下行直肠癌前切除具有损伤少，恢复快，肿瘤切除彻底和操作安全等优点，值得临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清除术9例

目的　探讨采用腹腔镜技术行腹膜后淋巴结清除术治疗I期非精原细胞瘤的方法和效果。　方法　 2 0 0 1年 1月～ 2 0 0 2年 5月 ,对 9例临床诊断为I期非精原细胞瘤的患者行腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清除术。　结果　手术均成功 ,平均手术时间 2 60min ,无患者需要输血 ,无严重并发症发生 ,术后平均住院时间 5 5d,术后平均随访 9个月无肿瘤复发。　结论　腹腔镜腹膜后淋巴结清除术非常适宜于治疗I期非精原细胞瘤 ,手术安全、创伤小、效果良好     

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for nonseminomatous germ cell tumors: long-term oncologic outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection was first described in 1992, and has become more commonly practiced at certain centers. Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection may be less morbid than open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, but more costly. Controversy exists, however, regarding the oncologic adequacy of the procedure. The published literature regarding the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is reviewed herein. RECENT FINDINGS: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection has not been as widely adopted as other laparoscopic procedures for genitourinary malignancy. There have only been seven publications in the last 3 years, often coming from the same centers. Recently there has been a change in practice with a greater effort to perform therapeutic laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection and not simply a staging procedure. Adjuvant chemotherapy is no longer routinely offered to all patients with positive nodes. SUMMARY: The impressive cure rate and decreasing morbidity associated with conventional open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection are difficult to improve upon. While on par with open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection series, the current oncologic outcomes are difficult to attribute to successful laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection alone. Most patients with viable tumor in the retroperitoneal lymph node dissection specimen received chemotherapy. Thus, we must await follow-up of the patients who declined adjuvant chemotherapy after laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection or the results of more recent initiatives with laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection alone.     

Laparoscopic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumors: Indications and Limitations

Purpose

We describe our experience with laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in 26 patients with nonseminomatous germ cell tumors: 17 had stage I disease with no clinical (computerized tomography, ultrasound or tumor markers) evidence of metastases and 9 (2 with stage IIb and 7 with stage IIc disease) had residual tumor after chemotherapy but with negative tumor markers. Laparoscopic dissection was performed to assess more fully pathological status of the relevant retroperitoneal lymph nodes in both groups.

Materials and Methods

The patient was positioned and trocars were introduced at sites similar to that used for transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy (flank position with 3, 10 mm. and 2, 5 mm. ports). After the white line of Toldt was incised and the colon was reflected anteromedially, the retroperitoneal space was exposed. The landmarks of lymph node dissection were then isolated, including the ureter, aorta, inferior vena cava and both renal veins. Lymph node dissection was performed identical to that for open surgery, with a modified template including the paracaval, interaortocaval, upper preaortic and right common iliac nodes for right tumors, and para-aortic and upper preaortic nodes for left tumors. Lymph node chains were retrieved with a small organ bag.

Results

The procedure was completed successfully in 16 of 17 patients with stage I disease (mean duration 268 minutes for the left and 312 minutes for the right sides). No intraoperative complications were encountered. One patient had delayed ureteral stenosis requiring operative repair, 1 had a pulmonary embolism with an uneventful outcome and 1 who underwent laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection on the right side later had retrograde ejaculation. Embryonal carcinoma was found in 1 of the 17 patients.Average postoperative hospital stay was 4.5 days for patients without complications or conversion to an open procedure. After a median followup of 27 months no patient had regional relapse but 2 had pulmonary metastases that were treated successfully with 3 cycles of platinum based chemotherapy. Laparoscopic dissection was significantly more difficult in patients with stage II tumors after chemotherapy. Only in 2 patients with stage IIb disease was laparoscopic lymphadenectomy successful. In 5 of the 7 patients with stage IIc cancer portions of the dissection had to be done after conversion to an open (conventional) operation via a small incision (suprainguinal or pararectal). In 1 patient the laparoscopic approach was completely abandoned and converted to an open operation via a standard midline incision. In all 9 cases histopathological examination revealed complete necrosis. No patient has evidence of disease.

Conclusions

Our preliminary experience suggests that a modified laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is feasible for stage I tumors. However, it cannot be recommended after previous chemotherapy (stages IIb and IIc disease).     

Laparoscopic versus open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection: a cost analysis

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is significantly less morbid than open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection but it is generally more costly due to longer operative time and disposable equipment. In response to budgetary pressure at our large county hospital we identified the cost components of laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection that could be targeted to decrease procedure costs before expanding our laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature review of open and laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection was performed and certain parameters were abstracted, including operative time and equipment, hospital stay, perioperative complications and surgical success rates. Using these data the projected overall cost and individual cost centers at our institution were compared for open and laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Decision tree analysis models were devised to estimate the cost of each treatment using commercially available software. We performed 1 and 2-way sensitivity analysis to evaluate the effect of individual treatment variables on overall cost. Base case analysis involved a young man with clinical stage I nonseminomatous testicular cancer who was a candidate for retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. RESULTS: Based on a review of the costs at our institution open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection was a less costly procedure at $7,162 versus $7,804 for the laparoscopic approach. The slight cost superiority of the open approach was due to significantly lower costs associated with operating room time and equipment. On the other hand, the laparoscopic procedure showed a cost advantage for hospital stay. On 1-way sensitivity analysis laparoscopic dissection was less costly when operative time was less than 3.6 hours, hospitalization was less than 2.2 days or laparoscopic equipment costs were less than $768. On 2-way sensitivity analysis the laparoscopic approach was cost advantageous when performed in less than 5 hours or when the patient was discharged home within 2 days postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The primary cost variables for surgical treatment for testicular cancer include operative time, hospital stay and equipment cost. According to published data and decision tree analysis open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is slightly less costly (less than $650) than laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for the surgical treatment of clinical stage I nonseminomatous testicular cancer at our institution. Our model identifies several measures that can be applied at any institution to render laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection economically superior to the open approach.     

Post‐chemotherapy nerve‐sparing laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in stage IIB testicular cancer

We report our experience of extraperitoneal nerve‐sparing laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection after chemotherapy. Six patients were diagnosed with non‐seminomatous germ cell tumor after orchiectomy and clinical stage IIB disease. Nerve‐sparing laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection was carried out for residual retroperitoneal tumors after cisplatin‐based chemotherapy. The median tumor diameter was 2.95 cm before chemotherapy and 1.95 cm after chemotherapy. A modified left (n = 1), right (n = 1) and bilateral (n = 4) template for the dissection area was used. Surgery was successfully completed in all patients and no conversion to open surgery was necessary. Median operative time was 394 min (range 212–526 min). Median blood loss was 75 mL (range 10–238 mL). The overall complication rate was 33.3% (2/6). Two patients had prolonged lymphatic leakage (grade I), which was managed conservatively. Antegrade ejaculation was preserved in all six patients. The histopathological findings showed that two patients had mature teratoma and four patients had necrotic tissue. After a median follow up of 30 months (range 24–36), no recurrence of disease was observed. We can conclude that extraperitoneal nerve‐sparing laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for residual tumors after chemotherapy is a feasible operation. The oncological outcomes need to be confirmed in a certain number of patients with longer follow up.     

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in the extremely obese patient: technical insight into access and port placement.

PURPOSE: We report on laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) in a morbidly obese patient to discuss the associated technical steps for satisfactory completion of staging lymphadenectomy. METHODS: A laparoscopic RPLND was performed using a modified template on the left side. Initially, 4 ports were placed with the patient in the supine position. Three were placed 3 cm to the left of midline and one in the anterior axillary line, at the level of the umbilicus. During the operation, successful bowel retraction necessitated placement of 2 additional ports in the anterior axillary line (just above the pelvis and off the tip of the 12th rib). Using these 6 trocar sites, the dissection was completed, and 44 lymph nodes were obtained. RESULTS: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection was accomplished in an extremely obese patient with acceptable morbidity by using prudent modification of standard techniques. CONCLUSION: If access and port placement limitations are overcome, the benefits of laparoscopy in the obese are clear. This report serves as a signpost that laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testes cancer can also be accomplished using modification of standard techniques.     

Case report: the danger of postchemotherapy laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for nonseminomatous testicular carcinoma

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is a feasible, minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of testicular cancer patients who require surgery to address the retroperitoneal lymph nodes. We report a case of retroperitoneal recurrent disease including a port-site metastasis secondary to laparoscopic RPLND.     

Short-term morbidity of primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in a contemporary group of patients

PURPOSE: We defined the blood loss, operative time and short-term morbidity of primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in a contemporary series to assess whether laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection actually confers the magnitude of benefit claimed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of 75 consecutive patients who underwent primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection during the 18 months ending May 2005. Two patients were excluded, including 1 who underwent right hemicolectomy for cecal adenocarcinoma and 1 with a pure seminomatous intra-abdominal testicle. RESULTS: Of the 73 patients 69 (94%) underwent unilateral dissection and 60 (82.2%) underwent a nerve sparing procedure. Mean operative time was 132 minutes (range 81 to 246) and mean blood loss was 207 cc (range 50 to 500). Nasogastric tubes were placed in 2 patients (2.7%). Mean time to start clear liquids was 1.0 day. Mean hospital stay was 2.8 days (range 2 to 4). CONCLUSIONS: The short-term morbidity of open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, including operative time, blood loss and hospital stay, has significantly improved compared to historical controls. Perioperative management has changed with time. Comparing the morbidity of laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection to that of historical controls is inappropriate.     

Post-chemotherapy robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RRPLND) in testicular cancer

We report here on the safety and feasibility of using robotic surgery for the excision of residual retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis in patients with non-seminomatous germ cell testicular tumors (NSGCT) post-chemotherapy (PC). Two men (age 20 and 21?years, respectively) with residual PC retroperitoneal disease underwent robotic assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RRPLND). The primary testicular tumor was on the right testicle in one patient and on the left testicle in the other patient. Both patients had a history of testicular NSGCT and bulky retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis and had received chemotherapy. The technique, feasibility, and safety of the RRPLND procedure are reported. RRPLND was safely accomplished in both patients. A right-side approach was performed in one patient; a left-side approach was utilized in the other patient. In both patients, the field of dissection was an ipsilateral template for lymph node dissection, including excision of the residual mass. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were encountered. Pathology showed mature teratomatous elements in both patients. We demonstrate here the safety and feasibility of performing template RRPLND in patients with PC residual masses. Further reports are needed to compare this procedure to its other approaches, namely, standard open and laparoscopic RPLND.     

LAPAROSCOPIC PELVIC LYMPH NODE DISSECTION FOR CARCINOMA OF THE PROSTATE AND BLADDER

Improvements in instruments and camera systems have allowed the development of operative techniques for laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection. A series of dissections in 20 patients is reported. The mean operation time was 1 h and 40min. When the nodes appeared malignant, a node biopsy was sent for frozen section. If this was positive, the dissection went no further. In three patients it was necessary to complete the operation by open surgery. A mean number of five lymph nodes was dissected per side. After laparoscopic dissection, all patients were discharged the morning after surgery. The operation is possible without making great demands on hospital bed occupancy and the patient has a comfortable and speedy return to normal activity. Using laparoscopic techniques, node dissection becomes a more appealing option as an investigation and staging procedure.