腹腔镜单部位供肾切除术。

Arvind P Ganpule, Shashikant Mishra, Ravindra Sabnis
{"title":"腹腔镜单部位供肾切除术。","authors":"Arvind P Ganpule,&nbsp;Shashikant Mishra,&nbsp;Ravindra Sabnis","doi":"10.4103/0970-1591.94960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A donor would prefer a minimally invasive procedure because of lesser morbidity, this may be the reason that laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) rates have exponentially increased. The rationale dictates that a virtually scarless surgery would be most beneficial to this patient subgroup. In this article, we review the approach, instrumentation, dissection and retrieval issues and the results of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-DN). The existing literature on LESS-DN was reviewed in Pubmed. The various access sites described for LESS-DN include the umbilicus and Pfannenstiel incision. The steps of LESS-DN duplicate those of standard LDN. There is a paucity of studies comparing LESS-DN with LDN, particularly randomized studies. The most challenging step of LESS-DN is graft retrieval. Authors have described a variety of methods for graft retrieval which include manual methods, and those using retrieval bags. In the majority of the studies, the graft retrieval time is longer in comparison to standard LDN. However, the graft outcome in recipients is comparable. In this article, we also allude to the complications mentioned in various series. LESS-DN is currently an evolving procedure. The procedure requires a high level of skills in laparoscopic surgery. The choice of access site, access site ports and the type of instruments to be used is a matter of surgeon preference. Although the warm ischemia time in most of the series is longer in LESS-DN, this has not translated into poor recipient outcomes. Further work needs to be done to make the retrieval quick.Current literature from comparative studies with standard LDN suggests that the results in terms of graft outcome are comparable.</p>","PeriodicalId":520644,"journal":{"name":"Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India","volume":" ","pages":"65-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/47/cc/IJU-28-65.PMC3339790.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Arvind P Ganpule,&nbsp;Shashikant Mishra,&nbsp;Ravindra Sabnis\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/0970-1591.94960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A donor would prefer a minimally invasive procedure because of lesser morbidity, this may be the reason that laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) rates have exponentially increased. The rationale dictates that a virtually scarless surgery would be most beneficial to this patient subgroup. In this article, we review the approach, instrumentation, dissection and retrieval issues and the results of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-DN). The existing literature on LESS-DN was reviewed in Pubmed. The various access sites described for LESS-DN include the umbilicus and Pfannenstiel incision. The steps of LESS-DN duplicate those of standard LDN. There is a paucity of studies comparing LESS-DN with LDN, particularly randomized studies. The most challenging step of LESS-DN is graft retrieval. Authors have described a variety of methods for graft retrieval which include manual methods, and those using retrieval bags. In the majority of the studies, the graft retrieval time is longer in comparison to standard LDN. However, the graft outcome in recipients is comparable. In this article, we also allude to the complications mentioned in various series. LESS-DN is currently an evolving procedure. The procedure requires a high level of skills in laparoscopic surgery. The choice of access site, access site ports and the type of instruments to be used is a matter of surgeon preference. Although the warm ischemia time in most of the series is longer in LESS-DN, this has not translated into poor recipient outcomes. Further work needs to be done to make the retrieval quick.Current literature from comparative studies with standard LDN suggests that the results in terms of graft outcome are comparable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520644,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"65-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/47/cc/IJU-28-65.PMC3339790.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.94960\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.94960","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

由于发病率较低,供者更倾向于微创手术,这可能是腹腔镜供者肾切除术(LDN)率呈指数增长的原因。基本原理表明,一个几乎无疤痕的手术将是最有益的病人亚组。在本文中,我们回顾了腹腔镜单部位供肾切除术(LESS-DN)的入路,器械,解剖和检索问题以及结果。在Pubmed上对现有的关于LESS-DN的文献进行了综述。LESS-DN所描述的各种进入部位包括脐和Pfannenstiel切口。LESS-DN的步骤与标准LDN相同。比较LESS-DN和LDN的研究很少,特别是随机研究。LESS-DN最具挑战性的步骤是移植物回收。作者描述了各种方法的移植物检索,其中包括手工方法,和那些使用检索袋。在大多数研究中,与标准LDN相比,移植物回收时间更长。然而,受者的移植结果是可比较的。在本文中,我们还暗示了在各个系列中提到的并发症。LESS-DN目前是一个不断发展的过程。这个过程需要高水平的腹腔镜手术技能。进入部位、进入部位端口和使用的器械类型的选择取决于外科医生的偏好。尽管在大多数系列中,LESS-DN的热缺血时间更长,但这并没有转化为不良的受体预后。需要做进一步的工作使检索快速。目前与标准LDN比较研究的文献表明,移植结果具有可比性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy.

Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy.

Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy.

Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy.

A donor would prefer a minimally invasive procedure because of lesser morbidity, this may be the reason that laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) rates have exponentially increased. The rationale dictates that a virtually scarless surgery would be most beneficial to this patient subgroup. In this article, we review the approach, instrumentation, dissection and retrieval issues and the results of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-DN). The existing literature on LESS-DN was reviewed in Pubmed. The various access sites described for LESS-DN include the umbilicus and Pfannenstiel incision. The steps of LESS-DN duplicate those of standard LDN. There is a paucity of studies comparing LESS-DN with LDN, particularly randomized studies. The most challenging step of LESS-DN is graft retrieval. Authors have described a variety of methods for graft retrieval which include manual methods, and those using retrieval bags. In the majority of the studies, the graft retrieval time is longer in comparison to standard LDN. However, the graft outcome in recipients is comparable. In this article, we also allude to the complications mentioned in various series. LESS-DN is currently an evolving procedure. The procedure requires a high level of skills in laparoscopic surgery. The choice of access site, access site ports and the type of instruments to be used is a matter of surgeon preference. Although the warm ischemia time in most of the series is longer in LESS-DN, this has not translated into poor recipient outcomes. Further work needs to be done to make the retrieval quick.Current literature from comparative studies with standard LDN suggests that the results in terms of graft outcome are comparable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信