Abstract：Objective:To introduce our experience in using modified retroperitoneoscopic puncture site for the operation of kidney diseases. Methods:We admitted 84 cases who had different kidney diseases (41 male and 43 female patients, 46 on the right side and 38 on the left side, mean age (45.6±11.8) years. We designed three modified incisions according to different surgeries and specimen size and named them as follow: M1, M2 and M3. Different patients could choose corresponding modified incisions for their retroperitoneoscopic surgery. The clinical data were compared with those of 75 patients who had undergone the same or similar procedures using classical 3-port incisions. Results:Of the 84 patients, 83 cases were underwent retroperitoneoscopic kidney surgery using modified puncture site. Only 1 case required open conversion. The mean operative time was (72±18)min and average blood loss was (29±11)ml. No serious postperative complications and death were observed. To the choice of modified incisions, patients with chyluria, nonfunctional or atrophic kidney and renal cyst were finished by M1 method, and only 6 cases with huge renal carcinoma were finished by M3 method. Of the rest 52 cases with renal tumor, 19 cases were completed by M2 method, and 33 cases were still completed by M1 method. A significant difference in favor of modified group was noted with respect to analgesia use in all three modified methods (diclofenac sodium, 50∶100 mg, P＜0.05) and cosmetic outcome (score, 8.9±2.2∶7.3±2.8, P＜0.05 ) in M1 and M2 method (score, 8.7±2.5∶7.3±2.8, P＜0.05 ). Conclusions:Our modified retroperitoneoscopic puncture sites have more cosmetic and individual advantage and meet different kidney surgeries.
胡东亮, 王行环, 胡万里, 张卫兵, 倪栋. 腹膜后改良穿刺位点治疗84例肾脏疾病报告[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2013, 2(6): 371-373.
Hu Dongliang, Wang Xinghuan, Hu Wanli, Zhang Weibing, Ni Dong. The experience of treating 84 patients with different kidney diseases using modified retroperitoneoscopic puncture site. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2013, 2(6): 371-373.
[1]Zhang X, Fu B, Lang B, et al. Technique of anatomical retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy with report of 800 cases. J Urol, 2007, 177(4):1254-1257. [2]Ou CH, Yang WH. Hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy with the patient spread-eagled: an approach through acompletely supine position. J Urol, 2008,180(5):1918-1922. [3]Zhang X, Ye ZQ, Chen Z, et al. Comparison of open surgery versus retroperitoneoscopic approach to chyluria. J Urol,2003,169(3):991-993. [4]Wolf JS Jr. Selection of patients for hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery. J Endourol,2004,18(4):327-332. [5]Gill IS, Canes D, Aron M, et al. Single port transumbilical (E-NOTES) donor nephrectomy. J Urol,2008,182(2):637-641. [6]Gettman MT, Box G, Averch T, et al. Consensus statement on natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and single incision laparoscopic surgery: heralding a new era in urology? Eur Urol, 2008,53(6):1117-1120. [7]Capolicchio JP, Saemi A, Trotter S, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy with a modified hand-assisted approach.Urology,2011,77(3):607-611. [8]Stein RJ, White WM, Goel RK,et al. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery using GelPort as the access platform. Eur Urol,2010,57(1):132-136. [9]Canes D, Desai MM, Aron M, et al. Transumbilical single-port surgery: evolution and current status.Eur Urol,2008,54(5):1020-1029.
