机器人辅助腹腔镜活体供肾切取术(附2例报告)

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (634 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的:探讨机器人辅助腹腔镜活体供肾切取术的安全性和可行性。方法:对2例亲属活体供肾者行机器人辅助腹腔镜活体供肾切取术。结果:术前机器人定位时间28 min,平均手术时间80 min,出血约50 ml,热缺血时间3 min。开放血流后,2例移植肾脏均在1 min内开始分泌尿液。2例受者术后1周内血肌酐均降至正常,无手术并发症,无排斥反应。2例供者术后复查肾功能正常,住院5~6 d,无手术并发症。结论:机器人精细的解剖分离和高效的止血提高了术者手术技巧,机器人辅助腹腔镜活体供肾切取术安全可行。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章

关键词 ：肾移植, 机器人辅助腹腔镜, 活体供肾

Abstract：Objective: To investigate the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted living donor (RALD) nephrectomy. Methods: With the use of Da Vinci robotic surgical system, 2 donors underwent RALD nephrectomies in our institution. Results: The operation was performed successfully in the 2 patients without conversion to open surgery. The operative mean time was 80 min (not including preoperative set-up time of Da Vinci surgical system about 28 min). The blood loss was about 50 mL. The warm ischemia time was 3 min. The urine output was prompt in the 2 cases within 1 min. Recipient creatinine was normal within 1 week, without any syndrome or renal dysfunction. Donor hospital stay was 5-6 days after operation, without any syndrome or renal dysfunction. Conclusions: The RALD nephrectomy is safe and feasible, with dissecting meticulously and preventing problematic bleeding more easily.

Key words： kidney transplantation robotic-assisted laparoscopic living donors

收稿日期: 2015-01-20

ZTFLH:

R617

基金资助:中国人民解放军总医院临床科研扶持基金(01022408)

通讯作者: 张旭 E-mail: xzhang@foxmail.com

引用本文:

刘圣圳,董隽,罗光达,孙博,卢锦山,祖强,张旭. 机器人辅助腹腔镜活体供肾切取术(附2例报告)[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2015, 4(2): 75-77.
Liu Shengzhen, Dong Jun, Luo Guangda Sun Bo, Lu Jinshan, Zu Qiang, Zhang Xu. Robotic-assisted living donor nephrectomy (two cases of reports). JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2015, 4(2): 75-77.

链接本文:

http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/abstract/abstract754.shtml 或 http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/Y2015/V4/I2/75

[1]Leventhal JR, Deeik RK, Joehl RJ, et al. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy--is it safe? Transplantation, 2000,70(4):602-606.
[2]Pradel FG, Limcangco MR, Mullins CD, et al. Patients' attitudes about living donor transplantation and living donor nephrectomy. Am J Kidney Dis, 2003,41(4):849-858.
[3]Tuncer M, Gurkan A, Erdogan O, et al. Lack of impact of human leukocyte antigen matching in living donor kidney transplantation: experience at Akdeniz University. Transplant Proc, 2005,37(7):2969-2972.
[4]Subramonian K, DeSylva S, Bishai P, et al. Acquiring surgical skills: a comparative study of open versus laparoscopic surgery. European urology, 2004,45(3):346-351.
[5]Yohannes P, Rotariu P, Pinto P, et al. Comparison of robotic versus laparoscoic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology, 2002,60(1):39-45.
[6]Guillonneau B, Abbou CC, Doublet JD, et al. Proposal for a "European Scoring System for Laparoscopic Operations in Urology". Eur Urol, 2001,40(1):2-6.
[7]张旭, 高江平, 符伟军, 等. 机器人辅助腹腔镜在泌尿外科手术中的临床应用(附500例报告). 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2014,3(1):4-7.
[8]Horgan S, Vanuno D, Benedetti E. Early experience with robotically assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2002,12(1):64-70.
[9]Hubert J, Renoult E, Mourey E, et al. Complete robotic-assistance during laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies: an evaluation of 38 procedures at a single site. Int J Urol, 2007,14(11):986-989.
[10]Monn MF, Gramm AR, Bahler CD, et al. Economic and utilization analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. J Endourol, 2014,28(7):780-783.
[11]Horgan S, Benedetti E, Moser F. Robotically assisted donor nephrectomy for kidney transplantation. Am J Surg, 2004,188(4A Suppl):45S-51S.
[12]Buell JF, Hanaway MJ, Potter SR, et al. Hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy as an alternative to traditional laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy. Am J Transplant, 2002,2(10):983-988.