English
Russian
Robot-assisted and laparoscopic access for partial nephrectomy: experience of one clinic DOI: 10.29188/2222-8543-2020-13-5-30-35
- Zingerenko M.B. – Dr. Sc, Head of the Urology Department; Moscow, Russia;
https://doi.org/0000-0002-1322-9862 - Gazaryan M.A. – urologist, the Urology Department, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center named after A.S. Loginov; Moscow, Russia;
https://doi.org/0000-0002-3338-9935 - Ivanov A.G. – resident physician, the Urology Department, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center named after A.S. Loginov; Moscow, Russia;
https://doi.org/0000-0001-5917-7837 - Goncharov A.V. – resident physician, the Urology Department, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center named after A.S. Loginov; Moscow, Russia;
- Khatkov I.E. – corresponding member of RAS, Dr. Sc., MD, professor, Director of Moscow Clinical Scientific Center named after A.S. Loginov, chief-oncologist of the Department of Healthcare in Moscow, head of the department of faculty surgery at the medical faculty of Moscow State Medical University; Moscow, Russia;
https://doi.org/0000-0002-4088-8118
852 Introduction. In the last 20 years there are an annual increase in the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (about 2%) in the world. According to the standards of international clinical guidelines for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma in stage T1 kidney tumors (≤7 cm), it is advisable to resort to organ-sparing methods of treatment.
Purpose. The aim of the study was to compare the results of organ-sparing surgical treatment of patients with kidney tumors: robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN).
Materials and Methods. The study presents a retrospective analysis of the results of surgical treatment of 153 patients who underwent surgical treatment for rental cell carcinoma at MCSS named after A.S. Looginov for the period from 2015 to 2019 by a robot-assisted (group I) and laparoscopic method (group II).
Results. The operation time in patients of both groups did not differ statistically. The volume of blood loss and the time of warm ischemia are significantly greater in patients from group II. The length of hospital stay did not differ significantly in both groups. The gradient of decrease in creatinine clearance in the postoperative period is significantly higher in patients of group II. The positive surgical margin was significantly more common in patients of group II.
Discussion. According to the authors, the use of a robotic system when performing a partial nephrectomy makes it possible to achieve fewer general complications when performing operations of medium and high degrees of complexity.
Conclusions. RPN is a priority alternative to LPN by reducing the time of warm ischemia and the volume of blood loss, and also provides reliable oncological results.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Download | 593.19 KB |
Other issue articles
