切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (04) : 306 -310. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2022.04.005

临床研究

机器人辅助和普通腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤的比较
鲁文汇1, 张俊隆1, 陈凌武1, 丘少鹏1, 陈炜1, 罗俊航1, 陈旭1, 陈羽1,()   
  1. 1. 510080 广州,中山大学附属第一医院泌尿外科
  • 收稿日期:2022-03-02 出版日期:2022-08-01
  • 通信作者: 陈羽

Comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for the treatment of renal angiomyolipoma

Wenhui Lu1, Junlong Zhang1, Lingwu Chen1, Shaopeng Qiu1, Wei Chen1, Junhang Luo1, Xu Chen1, Yu Chen1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Urology, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China
  • Received:2022-03-02 Published:2022-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Yu Chen
引用本文:

鲁文汇, 张俊隆, 陈凌武, 丘少鹏, 陈炜, 罗俊航, 陈旭, 陈羽. 机器人辅助和普通腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤的比较[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 306-310.

Wenhui Lu, Junlong Zhang, Lingwu Chen, Shaopeng Qiu, Wei Chen, Junhang Luo, Xu Chen, Yu Chen. Comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for the treatment of renal angiomyolipoma[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(04): 306-310.

目的

对比肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤(RAML)患者中应用机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RAPN)与普通腹腔镜下肾部分切除术(LPN)的安全性及有效性。

方法

收集2016年1月至2021年8月我院收治的肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤患者198例,其中80例为机器人辅助肾部分切除术组,118例为腹腔镜下肾部分切除术组。采用倾向性评分匹配后分析比较两术式的临床指标。

结果

198例患者中有3例术中中转开放(包括2例LPN,1例RAPN),1例LPN术中损伤输尿管,其余均顺利完成手术。RAPN组术中热缺血时间显著低于LPN组;RAPN组术后血红蛋白(Hb)差值百分比及eGFR差值百分比均显著低于LPN组(P<0.05);手术时间、术中估计出血量、术中及术后输血率、术后并发症、术后引流量、引流管留置时间、胃肠道功能恢复时间、术后住院时间方面两组差异无统计学意义。

结论

在肾血管平滑肌脂肪瘤患者中,应用机器人辅助肾部分切除术相较于普通腹腔镜下肾部分切除术具有显著优势,手术出血更少,热缺血时间更短,能更大程度保留肾功能。

Objective

To compare the safety and efficacy of robot assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in treatment of patients with renal angiomyolipoma (RAML).

Methods

198 patients diagnosed with renal angiomyolipoma admitted to our hospital from January 2016 to August 2021 were collected, including 80 in the robot assisted partial nephrectomy group and 118 in the laparoscopic partial nephrectomy group. After propensity score matching, the clinical data were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

Results

Among 198 cases, 3 cases were converted to open partial nephrectomy (including 2 cases of LPN and 1 case of RAPN), 1 case of LPN injured ureter during operation, and the rest were successfully completed. The warm ischemia time in RAPN group was significantly less than that in LPN group. The percentage of postoperative Hb loss and eGFR loss in RAPN group were significantly lower than those in LPN group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in operation time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative blood transfusion rate, postoperative complications rate, postoperative drainage volume, catheterization time, gastrointestinal functional recovery time and length of postoperative hospital stay.

Conclusion

Compared with LPN, RAPN has significant advantages in treating patients with renal angiomyolipoma in terms of less blood loss, shorter warm ischemia time and greater preservation of renal function.

图1 机器人辅助经腹入路腹腔镜下肾部分切除术套管位置
图2 机器人辅助经腹膜后入路腹腔镜下肾部分切除术套管位置
表1 倾向性评分匹配(PSM)前后行肾部分切除术的两组患者的一般基线资料
表2 RAPN与LPN手术相关指标比较
表3 RAPN与LPN围手术期指标比较
[1]
Fittschen A, Wendlik I, Oeztuerk S, et al. Prevalence of sporadic renal angiomyolipoma: a retrospective analysis of 61,389 in- and out-patients[J]. Abdominal Imaging, 2014, 39(5):1009-1013.
[2]
Lee KH, Tsai HY, Kao YT, et al. Clinical behavior and management of three types of renal angiomyolipomas[J]. J Formos Med Assoc, 2018, 118(1 Pt 1): 162-169.
[3]
Chen L, Deng W, Luo Y, et al. Comparison of robot-assisted and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal hilar tumors: results from a tertiary referral center[J]. J Endourol, 2020, 0151.
[4]
王卫平,吴震杰,时佳子, 等. 机器人辅助腹腔镜与腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗T1b期肾肿瘤的疗效对比[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2018, 39(5): 338-341.(与文献13重复)
[5]
李智斌,袁建林,张更,等. 单中心机器人辅助腹腔镜与腹腔镜肾部分切除术的比较[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(2): 9-13.
[6]
许晖阳,莫承强,王宗任, 等. 机器人辅助腹腔镜下肾部分切除术的短期疗效分析(附22例报告)[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2017, 32(5): 335-338.
[7]
Michels WM, Grootendorst DC, Verduijn M, et al. Performance of the Cockcroft-Gault, MDRD, and new CKD-EPI formulas in relation to GFR, age, and body size[J]. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 2010, 5(6): 1003-1009.
[8]
程莹,李宁娜,游志清, 等. 三种CKD-EPI公式与改良MDRD公式诊断糖尿病肾病一致性分析[J]. 中国全科医学, 2016, 19(29): 3584-3588.
[9]
Flum AS, Hamoui N, Said MA, et al. Update on the diagnosis and management of renal angiomyolipoma[J]. J Urol, 2016, 195(4 Part 1): 834-846.
[10]
Courtney M, Mulholland D, O'Neill D, et al. Natural growth pattern of sporadic renal angiomyolipoma[J]. Acta Radiol, 2021, 62(2): 276-280.
[11]
Bhatt JR, Richard PO, Kim NS, et al. Natural history of renal angiomyolipoma (aml): most patients with large amls >4 cm can be offered active surveillance as an initial management strategy[J]. Eur Urol, 2016, 70(1): 85-90.
[12]
Chang KD, Abdel Raheem A, Kim KH, et al. Functional and oncological outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a multicentre comparative matched-pair analyses with a median of 5 years' follow-up[J]. BJU international, 2018, 122(4): 618-626.
[13]
王卫平,吴震杰,时佳子, 等. 机器人辅助腹腔镜与腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗T1b期肾肿瘤的疗效对比[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2018, 39(5): 338-341.
[14]
Zhang S, Lin T, Liu G, et al. Comparisons of the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for large angiomyolipomas: a propensity score-matched analysis[J]. Int Urol Nephrol, 2020, 52(1): 1675-1682.
[15]
刘鹏飞,严奉奇,倪建鑫, 等. 保留肾单位手术肾功能预后影响因素的研究进展[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2019, 24(12): 1049-1053.
[16]
Rod X, Peyronnet B, Seisen T, et al. Impact of ischaemia time on renal function after partial nephrectomy: a systematic review[J]. Bju International, 2016, 118(5): 692-705.
[17]
Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM, et al. Every minute counts when the renal hilum is clamped during partial nephrectomy[J]. Eur Urol, 2010, 58(3): 340-345.
[1] 李国新, 陈新华. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术食管空肠吻合的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-4.
[2] 李子禹, 卢信星, 李双喜, 陕飞. 食管胃结合部腺癌腹腔镜手术重建方式的选择[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 5-8.
[3] 李乐平, 张荣华, 商亮. 腹腔镜食管胃结合部腺癌根治淋巴结清扫策略[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 9-12.
[4] 陈方鹏, 杨大伟, 金从稳. 腹腔镜近端胃癌切除术联合改良食管胃吻合术重建His角对术后反流性食管炎的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 15-18.
[5] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[6] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[7] 任佳, 马胜辉, 王馨, 石秀霞, 蔡淑云. 腹腔镜全胃切除、间置空肠代胃术的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 31-34.
[8] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[9] 李博, 贾蓬勃, 李栋, 李小庆. ERCP与LCBDE治疗胆总管结石继发急性重症胆管炎的效果[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 60-63.
[10] 韩戟, 杨力, 陈玉. 腹部形态CT参数与完全腹腔镜全胃切除术术中失血量的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 88-91.
[11] 王露, 周丽君. 全腹腔镜下远端胃大部切除不同吻合方式对胃癌患者胃功能恢复、并发症发生率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.
[12] 冯旺, 马振中, 汤林花. CT扫描三维重建在肝内胆管细胞癌腹腔镜肝切除术中的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 104-107.
[13] 王庆亮, 党兮, 师凯, 刘波. 腹腔镜联合胆道子镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 313-313.
[14] 杨建辉, 段文斌, 马忠志, 卿宇豪. 腹腔镜下脾部分切除术[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 314-314.
[15] 叶劲松, 刘驳强, 柳胜君, 吴浩然. 腹腔镜肝Ⅶ+Ⅷ段背侧段切除[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2025, 14(02): 315-315.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?