Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Is It Worth Still Performing the Retroperitoneal Route?

Objective. The objective of this study was to compare perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes of TLPN (transperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy) versus RLPN (retroperitoneal). Patients and Methods. From 1997 to 2009, a retrospective study of 153 consecutive patients who underwent T...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Advances in Urology 2012-01, Vol.2012 (2012), p.341-345
Hauptverfasser: Ouzaid, Idir, Xylinas, Evanguelos, Pignot, Géraldine, Tardieu, Arnaud, Hoznek, Andras, Abbou, Clément-Claude, de la Taille, Alexandre, Salomon, Laurent
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective. The objective of this study was to compare perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes of TLPN (transperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy) versus RLPN (retroperitoneal). Patients and Methods. From 1997 to 2009, a retrospective study of 153 consecutive patients who underwent TLPN or RLPN for suspicious renal masses was performed. Complications, functional and oncological outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Results. With a mean followup of 39 and 32 months, respectively, 66 and 87 patients had TLPN and RLPN, respectively. Tumor location was more often posterior in the RLPN and more often anterior in the TLPN. Mean operative time and mean hospital stay were longer in the TLPN group with 190±85 min versus 154±47 (P=0.001) and 9.2±6.4 days versus 6.2±4.5 days (P
ISSN:1687-6369
1687-6377
DOI:10.1155/2012/473457