Article

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery radical nephrectomy.

Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Journal of endourology / Endourological Society (Impact Factor: 1.75). 02/2011; 25(2):159-65. DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0673
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The indications, instrumentation, surgical technique, and complications of laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN) are being described in detail in an attempt to familiarize urologists with this novel laparoscopic technique. Our initial experience of 30 consecutive cases of LESS-RN is reported. The results indicate that, in experienced hands, LESS-RN is feasible and safe, with results comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Nevertheless, larger series of patients are needed to prove if the increased technical difficulty of LESS-RN justifies its use in routine urologic practice.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
103 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Open surgery is the standard therapeutic approach for renal malignant tumor in children; while in adults, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) is used. Only few reports on LRN in children have been published because the most common form of pediatric renal malignancy, Wilms tumor, is well known for presenting with large palpable masses. Here, we report the case of a 13-year-old girl with small chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who was managed by LRN. RCC is a rare condition, with an incidence rate of only 2 to 6% of all renal tumors in children. We found LRN for small RCC to be feasible and safe.
    Journal of Pediatric Surgery Case Reports. 07/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) are the next steps in the evolution of laparoscopic surgery, promising reduced morbidity and improved cosmetic result. The inconsistent terminology initially used led to confusion. Understanding the technical evolution, the current status and a unified and simplified terminology are key issues for further acceptance of both approaches. OBJECTIVE: To present LESS and NOTES in its historical context and to clarify the associated terminology. METHOD: Extensive literature search took place using the PubMed. Several hundred publications in general surgery and urology regarding LESS are present including the expert opinion of members the European Society of Uro-technology (ESUT). RESULTS: The increasing interest on NOTES and LESS is reflected by a raising number of publications during the last 4 years. The initial confusion with the terminology of single-incision surgery represented a significant issue for further evolution of the technique. Thus, consortiums of experts searched a universally acceptable name for single-incision surgery. They determined that 'laparoendoscopic single-site surgery' (LESS) was both scientifically accurate and colloquially appropriate, the term being also ratified by the NOTES working group (Endourological Society) and the ESUT. For additional use of instruments, the terms hybrid NOTES and hybrid LESS should be used. Any single use of miniaturized instruments for laparoscopy should be called mini-laparoscopy. DISCUSSION: The evolution of LESS and most likely NOTES to a new standard of minimally invasive surgery could represent an evolutionary step even greater than the one performed by the establishment of laparoscopy over open surgery.
    World Journal of Urology 07/2012; · 2.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective.The aims of this study were to present cumulative experience with umbilical laparoendoscopic urological surgery using a reusable device and to evaluate outcomes and complications in the first 100 patients. Material and methods. Patients undergoing umbilical surgery with the KeyPort system and DuoRotate instruments (Richard Wolf, Knittlingen, Germany) were evaluated prospectively. Demographic, intraoperative and postoperative data were assessed. Results.Between October 2011 and July 2012, 79 pelvic (66 radical prostatectomy, 10 radical cystectomy, one diverticulectomy, one bilateral orchiectomy, one ureter reimplantation) and 21 renal (seven radical nephrectomy, six partial nephrectomy, five nephroureterectomy, two pyeloplasty, one pyelolithotomy) surgeries were performed through the umbilicus using this platform. Follow-up was 56.7 ± 12.6 weeks (mean ± SD). Mean age was 64.3 ± 10.3 years, body mass index 29 ± 4.6 kg/m(2), operative time 232 ± 106 min and estimated blood loss 260 ± 95 ml. Conversion to standard multiport laparoscopy was not necessary. An accessory port was used in 87 cases to facilitate suturing and conduct drainage extraction. Postoperative complications occurred in 24 cases (six Clavien grade I, 12 grade II, one grade IIIa, two grade IIIb, two grade IVa, one grade IVb). Mean hospital stay was 4.2 ± 4 days. Total transfusion rate was 10%. Mean visual analogue pain scale at day 2 was 2.1 ± 1.3 (0-10). Visual analogue wound satisfaction scale at month 1 was 9.2 ± 0.6 (0-10). No cancer-related events occurred during follow-up. Late complications (4%) were not related to the surgical approach. Conclusions.Umbilical KeyPort surgery is technically feasible for a great variety of procedures, both ablative and reconstructive. This access offers adequate surgical outcomes, scarce postoperative pain and security for the patient in the short term. Its reusable nature implies a noticeable economic advantage.
    Scandinavian journal of urology. 01/2014;