MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Laparoscopic approach to small renal mass

Teh GC

Urol Oncol, 2010 Nov-Dec;28(6):682-5.
PMID: 21062652 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.03.017

With maturing functional and oncologic outcomes data, open partial nephrectomy (OPN) has become the standard of care for T1a renal tumor. Laparoscopic approach can provide a speedier recovery with less blood loss and postoperative pain. Presuming adequate laparoscopic expertise, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy can provide equivalent oncologic outcome as for OPN albeit with higher urologic complications rate and longer warm ischemia time. With refinement of technique and use of robotic assistant, the shortcomings of laparoscopic approach can be further reduced. This article is a mini-review on the current status of laparoscopic approach to partial nephrectomy in the management of small renal mass.

Matched MeSH terms: Nephrectomy/methods*
Feasibility and safety of transvaginal specimen extraction for laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: An Indonesian perspective compared with three different approaches

Hendri AZ, Soerohardjo I, Dewi KA, Danurdoro A

Med J Malaysia, 2023 May;78(3):270-278.
PMID: 37271835

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LLDN) continues to expand in minimally invasive surgery; nevertheless, the studies are inadequate to compare standard kidney extraction with TV-NOSE in less-developed countries. This study compared TV-NOSE with conventional kidney specimen extractions.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the feasibility of TV-NOSE in live donor nephrectomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 53 patients received LDN surgery at our hospital from September 2017 to December 2021. Retrospectively, living donor nephrectomy with TV-NOSE was compared to three different surgical procedures with standard specimen extraction.
RESULTS: 53 donor patients were included: 15 open (OLDN), 12 retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy (RPLDN), 10 transperitoneal living donor nephrectomy (TPLDN), and 16 standard laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with transvaginal extraction (SLLDN TV-NOSE). SLLDN TVNOSE's longer operating time (p<0.0041) did not affect graft function. SLLDN TV-NOSE and RPLDN had shorter lengths of stay and better VAS trends than open LDN and TPLDN (p<0.05). SLLDN TV-NOSE donors reported acceptable surgical outcomes and unchanged sexual function. All patients had similar discharge creatinine levels, with 1-year transplant survival of 98% and just 1 graft loss in the TPLDN group.
CONCLUSION: SLLDN TV-NOSE is equivalent to RPLDN and better than open LDN and TPLDN in terms of duration of stay, VAS score, surgical outcomes, and sexual function. TVNOSE is a safe surgical procedure with an acceptable donor complication. TV-NOSE may be safely conducted in both developed and developing countries with proper patient selection.

Matched MeSH terms: Nephrectomy/methods
Transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal tumour disease versus non-tumour disease: What are the differences in outcomes?

Khai YT, Teck MT

Med J Malaysia, 2020 05;75(3):240-245.
PMID: 32467539

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic nephrectomy is the standard of care for the removal of both non-functioning and tumourbearing kidneys. This study was conducted to compare the characteristics and outcomes follow-ing laparoscopic transperitoneal nephrectomy (TP) for tumour and nontumour disease.
METHODS: We retro-spectively reviewed all TP nephrectomies performed in the Hospital Sultanah Bahiyah Alor Setar, Kedah between January 2016 and July 2017.
RESULTS: A total of 36 eligible cases were identified, 10 of which were for renal tumours and the others for nonfunctioning kidneys. There were no statistically significant differ-ences between the two groups in terms of demographics and comorbidities. We also did not identify any sta-tistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of operating time, blood loss, need for transfusion, septic complications and postoperative recovery. The only significant difference between the groups was the postoperative rise in serum creatinine, which was higher in the tumour disease group (mean rise 23.4 vs 5.35µmol/l; p = 0.012).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that laparoscopic nephrectomy is both feasible and safe for the treatment of tumour and non-tumour renal disease with low complication rates in both groups.

Matched MeSH terms: Nephrectomy/methods*
Fulltext Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy: our experience in Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Ho CC, Zulkifli MZ, Nazri J, Sundram M

Med J Malaysia, 2008 Mar;63(1):41-3.
PMID: 18935731

Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HAL-N) and nephroureterectomy (HAL-NU) were introduced to bridge the gap between open and laparoscopic surgery. This newer technique has the benefits of both laparoscopic and open surgical approaches but has a shorter learning curve and decreased operative time compared to laparoscopic surgery. A review of our 2-year experience showed that for the seventeen cases of HAL-N that was performed, the mean operative time was 187.8 minutes while the mean length of hospital stay was 4.1 days. For the two HAL-NU cases, the mean operative time was 415 minutes while the mean length of hospital stay was 5.5 days. Only one complication occurred and it was an incisional hernia at the hand-port site. There was no recurrence for the carcinoma cases. Our experience shows that this technique is feasible and safe.

Matched MeSH terms: Nephrectomy/methods*