Partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: comparison of conventional open and robot-assisted approaches

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[Hideaki Miyake, Nobuyuki Hinata, Satoshi Imai, Junya Furukawa, Kazushi Tanaka, Masato Fujisawa]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2015
Enthalten in:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology, 20/4(2015-08-01), 808-813
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 605491224
LEADER caa a22 4500
001 605491224
003 CHVBK
005 20210128100509.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 210128e20150801xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.1007/s10147-015-0783-x  |2 doi 
035 |a (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10147-015-0783-x 
245 0 0 |a Partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: comparison of conventional open and robot-assisted approaches  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [Hideaki Miyake, Nobuyuki Hinata, Satoshi Imai, Junya Furukawa, Kazushi Tanaka, Masato Fujisawa] 
520 3 |a Background: To characterize clinical advantages in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for targeting renal hilar tumors, and compare them with those of open PN (OPN). Methods: This study included 31 consecutive patients with renal hilar tumors, consisting of 15 and 16 who received OPN and RAPN, respectively, between January 2012 and May 2014. The perioperative and oncological outcomes of the two approaches were compared. In this series, a hilar tumor was defined as a renal cortical tumor located in the renal hilum that was shown, by preoperative imaging, to be in direct physical contact with the renal artery and/or vein. Results: There were no significant differences between demographic variables of the OPN and RAPN groups. Intended surgical procedures were successfully completed for all 31 cases. Despite lack of a significant difference between ischemia times in the two groups, operative time for RAPN was significantly longer than for OPN, and estimated blood loss during RAPN was significantly less than that during OPN. There were no significant differences between incidence of postoperative complications or percentage decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate 4weeks after surgery in the two groups. Indicators of postoperative recovery seemed to favor RAPN compared with OPN, with significant differences. No patient in either group was pathologically diagnosed with a positive surgical margin. Conclusions: These findings suggest that, compared with OPN, RAPN is an effective, safe, and less invasive surgical option for renal hilar tumors. 
540 |a Japan Society of Clinical Oncology, 2015 
690 7 |a Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Open partial nephrectomy  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Hilar tumor  |2 nationallicence 
700 1 |a Miyake  |D Hideaki  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Hinata  |D Nobuyuki  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Imai  |D Satoshi  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Furukawa  |D Junya  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Tanaka  |D Kazushi  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Fujisawa  |D Masato  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
773 0 |t International Journal of Clinical Oncology  |d Springer Japan  |g 20/4(2015-08-01), 808-813  |x 1341-9625  |q 20:4<808  |1 2015  |2 20  |o 10147 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-015-0783-x  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
900 7 |a Metadata rights reserved  |b Springer special CC-BY-NC licence  |2 nationallicence 
908 |D 1  |a research-article  |2 jats 
949 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |F NATIONALLICENCE  |b NL-springer 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 856  |E 40  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-015-0783-x  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Miyake  |D Hideaki  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Hinata  |D Nobuyuki  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Imai  |D Satoshi  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Furukawa  |D Junya  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Tanaka  |D Kazushi  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Fujisawa  |D Masato  |u Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, 650-0017, Kobe, Japan  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 773  |E 0-  |t International Journal of Clinical Oncology  |d Springer Japan  |g 20/4(2015-08-01), 808-813  |x 1341-9625  |q 20:4<808  |1 2015  |2 20  |o 10147