Novel Gerota-edge-sling technique facilitates retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a comparative study

被引:0
作者
Chen, Wei [1 ]
Fang, Qixiang [1 ]
Ren, Haomin [2 ]
Ma, Lei [2 ]
Zeng, Jin [1 ]
Ding, Shangshu [3 ]
Wu, Dapeng [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Dept Urol, Affiliated Hosp 1, Xian 710061, Peoples R China
[2] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Dept Anesthesiol & Perioperat Med, Affiliated Hosp 1, Xian, Peoples R China
[3] Shaanxi Prov Peoples Hosp, Dept Urol, Xian, Peoples R China
关键词
Kidney neoplasms; Partial nephrectomy; Robotic surgical procedures; Retroperitoneal approach; Surgical technique; ADHERENT PERINEPHRIC FAT; TRANSPERITONEAL; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1186/s12894-022-01079-4
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy is markedly restricted by limited space and visual field. We introduced a novel Gerota-edge-sling (GES) technique with self-designed traction devices to overcome these defects by attaching Gerota fascia to abdominal wall, and comparatively evaluated its utilization with routine technique. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed for consecutive patients who underwent routine (control group) or GES assisted (GES group) retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors in our hospital between March 2018 and June 2020. Clinical data of perioperative outcomes and complications were collected and compared. Comparison of outcomes between anterior versus posterior tumor subgroups was also conducted. Linear regression analysis was used to define the relationship between dissection time and perinephric fat status in each group. Results Totally 103 patients were included, 48 in control and 55 in GES group respectively. All the procedures were completed successfully without conversion or positive surgical margin. GES group had significantly decreased console time (91 +/- 36 min vs. 117 +/- 41 min, p < 0.01) and dissection time (67 +/- 35 min vs. 93 +/- 38 min, p < 0.01) than control, while ischemia time, blood loss, and nephrometry score comparable between them. No major postoperative complications occurred. Dissection time of GES group was notably shorter than that of control in both anterior/posterior subgroups. Only in control group, dissection time was positively associated with perinephric fat status. Conclusions The GES technique acting as an adjunct to robotic arms with space-sparing feature, notably improves surgical exposure and facilitates dissection in retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy, while having great feasibility, efficacy and safety.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Novel Gerota-edge-sling technique facilitates retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a comparative study
    Wei Chen
    Qixiang Fang
    Haomin Ren
    Lei Ma
    Jin Zeng
    Shangshu Ding
    Dapeng Wu
    BMC Urology, 22
  • [2] Robot-assisted retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy without hilar occlusion VS classic robot-assisted retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy A retrospective comparative study
    Guo, Ju
    Zhang, Cheng
    Zhou, Xiaochen
    Wang, Gongxian
    Fu, Bin
    MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (38)
  • [3] Technique and Outcomes of Robot-assisted Retroperitoneoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: A Multicenter Study
    Hu, Jim C.
    Treat, Eric
    Filson, Christopher P.
    McLaren, Ian
    Xiong, Siwei
    Stepanian, Sevan
    Hafez, Khaled S.
    Weizer, Alon Z.
    Porter, James
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2014, 66 (03) : 542 - 549
  • [4] Retroperitoneal Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (rRAPN): Surgical Technique and Review
    Socarras, Moises Rodriguez
    Elbers, Javier Reinoso
    Rivas, Juan Gomez
    Autran, Ana Maria
    Esperto, Francesco
    Tortolero, Leonardo
    Carrion, Diego
    Sancha, Fernando Gomez
    CURRENT UROLOGY REPORTS, 2021, 22 (06)
  • [5] Retroperitoneal Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy in Obese Patients
    Malki, Manar
    Oakley, Joanne
    Hussain, Muddassar
    Barber, Neil
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2019, 29 (08): : 1027 - 1032
  • [6] Retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy, which one is better?
    Zhou, Jing
    Liu, Zheng-Huan
    Cao, De-Hong
    Peng, Zhu-Feng
    Song, Pan
    Yang, Luchen
    Liu, Liang-Ren
    Wei, Qiang
    Dong, Qiang
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (10): : 3299 - 3308
  • [7] Retroperitoneal approach for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: technique and early outcomes
    Porreca, A.
    D'Agostino, D.
    Dente, D.
    Dandrea, M.
    Salvaggio, A.
    Cappa, E.
    Zuccala, A.
    Del Rosso, A.
    Chessa, F.
    Romagnoli, D.
    Mengoni, F.
    Borghesi, M.
    Schiavina, R.
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2018, 44 (01): : 63 - 68
  • [8] Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparison of the Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Approaches
    Hughes-Hallett, Archie
    Patki, Prasad
    Patel, Nilay
    Barber, Neil J.
    Sullivan, Mark
    Thilagarajah, Ranjan
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2013, 27 (07) : 869 - 874
  • [9] Comparison of the effects of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy
    Tao, Meiman
    Cheng, Kang
    Xu, Wei
    Qian, Zhounan
    Pan, Peng
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2024, 40 (10) : 2202 - 2207
  • [10] Retroperitoneal Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Comparative Outcomes
    Carbonara, Umberto
    Crocerossa, Fabio
    Campi, Riccardo
    Veccia, Alessandro
    Cacciamani, Giovanni E.
    Amparore, Daniele
    Checcucci, Enrico
    Loizzo, Davide
    Pecoraro, Angela
    Marchioni, Michele
    Lonati, Chiara
    Sundaram, Chandru P.
    Mehrazin, Reza
    Porter, James
    Kaouk, Jihad H.
    Porpiglia, Francesco
    Ditonno, Pasquale
    Autorino, Riccardo
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2022, 40 : 27 - 37