Abstract：Objective: To compare the efficiency of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic and two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal neoplasm. Methods: From October 2013 to July 2014, a total of 30 cases of renal neoplasm were treated with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, of which 15 patients were operated by 3D laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (3D group) and 15 patients by 2D laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (2D group). Retroperitoneal approach was applied for all patients. The clinical data were compared between the two groups. Results: All surgeries were successfully completed without conversion. The operative time of 3D group was significantly shorter than 2D group (74±24 min vs. 105±49 min, P=0.036). No significantly difference was seen in the respect of warm ischemia, estimated blood loss, change of blood creatinine, drainage stay and hospital stay. With the mean follow-up of 6 months, no recurrence was seen in all patients. Conclusions: 3D laparoscopic technique compared with 2D traditional laparoscopic technique has obvious advantage in the spatial location and the sense of depth. To some extent, 3D laparoscopic surgery reduces operative difficulty and shortens operative time. This technique is worth to be promoted.
牟星宇,王明帅,宋黎明,邢念增. 3D腹腔镜与2D腹腔镜下行肾部分切除术的疗效比较[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2015, 4(2): 110-113.
Mu Xingyu, Wang Mingshuai, Song Liming, Xing Nianzeng. Comparison of 3D and 2D laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal neoplasm. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2015, 4(2): 110-113.
[1]Bhayani SB, Andriole GL. Three-Dimensional (3D) Vision: Does It Improve Laparoscopic Skills? An Assessment of a 3D Head-Mounted Visualization System. Rev Urol, 2005,7(4): 211-214. [2]Cicione A, Autorino R, Breda A, et al. Three-dimensional vs standard laparoscopy: comparative assessment using a validated program for laparoscopic urologic skills. Urology, 2013,82(6): 1444-1450. [3]Mashiach R, Mezhybovsky V,Nevler A, et al. Thr-ee-dimensional imaging improves surgical skill performance in a laparoscopic test model for both experienced and novice laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc, 2014,28(12):3489-3493. [4]李建业, 张军晖,陈宇东,等. 单纯阻断肾动脉后腹腔镜保留肾单位手术25例临床分析. 中华外科杂志, 2008, 46(24):1885-1886. [5]Tan HJ, Norton EC, Ye Z, et al. Long-term survival following partial vs radical nephrectomy among older patients with early-stage kidney cancer. JAMA, 2012,307(15):1629-1635. [6]Simone G, Papalia R, Guaglianone S, et al. Preoperative superselective transarterial embolization in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: technique, oncologic, and functional outcomes. J Endourol, 2009,23(9):1473-1478. [7]Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A, et al. Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal mass. J Urol, 2009,182(4):1271-1279. [8]Ramasamy R. Laparoscopic vs open partial nephrectomy for T1 renal tumours: evaluation of long-term oncological and functional outcomes in 340 patients. BJU Int, 2013,111(2): 189. [9]McDougall EM, Soble JJ, Wolf JS Jr, et al. Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional laparoscopic video systems. J Endourol, 1996,10(4):371-374. [10]Smith R, Day A, Rockall T, et al. Advanced stereoscopic projection technology significantly improves novice performance of minimally invasive surgical skills. Surg Endosc, 2012,26(6): 1522-1527. [11]Wagner OJ, Hagen M, Kurmann A, et al. Three-dimensional vision enhances task performance independently of the surgical method. Surg Endosc, 2012,26(10):2961-2968. [12]Storz P, Buess GF, Kunert W, et al. 3D HD versus 2D HD: surgical task efficiency in standardised phantom tasks. Surg Endosc, 2012,26(5):1454-1460. [13]梁朝朝,周骏.3D腹腔镜技术在泌尿外科的应用. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2013,2(3):161-162. [14]徐维锋,李汉忠,张玉石,等.3D腹腔镜与2D腹腔镜下保留肾单位手术的对照研究. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2014,35(6):410-413. [15]Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG, et al. Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: a multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol, 2009,182(3): 866-872.
