Author/Authors :
Nozaki، Tetsuo نويسنده Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences for Research, University of Toyama, 2630 Sugitani, Toyama 930- 0194, Japan. , , Asao، Yoshihiro نويسنده Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences for Research, University of Toyama, 2630 Sugitani, Toyama 930- 0194, Japan. , , Katoh، Tomonori نويسنده Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences for Research, University of Toyama, 2630 Sugitani, Toyama 930- 0194, Japan. , , Yasuda، Kenji نويسنده Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences for Research, University of Toyama, 2630 Sugitani, Toyama 930- 0194, Japan. , , Fuse، Hideki نويسنده Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences for Research, University of Toyama, 2630 Sugitani, Toyama 930- 0194, Japan. ,
Abstract :
Purpose: We report our experience of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy without ischemia
using a microwave tissue coagulator (MTC) for hand-assisted laparoscopic partial
nephrectomy (HALPN), conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (CLPN), and laparoendoscopic
single-site surgery for partial nephrectomy (LESSPN). We retrospectively compared
the results of these techniques to better define the individual role and the benefits.
Materials and Methods: From July 2005 to September 2012, 28 patients with small and exophytic
renal tumors underwent HALPN (n = 12), CLPN (n = 10) and LESSPN (n = 6). In these
procedures, the surgeon used an MTC for circumferential coagulation around the tumor. After
coagulation, the tumor was resected without renal pedicle clamping.
Results: The mean operative time was 259, 194 and 174 min for the HALPN, CLPN and
LESSPN groups respectively. Two patients (one in HALPN group and one in LESSPN
group) converted to laparotomy due to an inability to maintain hemostasis; however, there
were no conversions to ischemic partial nephrectomy or radical nephrectomy. No differences
between HALPN, CLPN and LESSPN were noted in terms of estimated blood loss, measured
analgesic requirements, outcomes, or complications.
Conclusion: We believe that these techniques are feasible and that they minimize the risk of
unexpected collateral thermal damage by appropriate MTC needle puncture. When deciding
to use HALPN, CLPN or LESSPN, our findings suggest that the choice of surgical approach
should depend on the patient’s individual circumstance.