Retroperitoneoscopy in urology: a systematic review

Lombardo, Riccardo; Martos, R.; Ribal, María J.; Alcaraz, Antonio; Tubaro, Andrea; Nunzio, Cosimo De

doi:10.23736/s0393-2249.18.03235-6

“…The treatment of ureteral calculi is particularly special, and open surgery, ureteroscopy, laparoscopy, and transdermal nephroscopy are often used [ 9 – 11 ]. Minimally invasive surgery is used if the patient has contraindications to traditional surgery [ 12 , 13 ]. At present, laparoscopy and ureteroscopy have been widely used in the treatment of urology, and ureteroscopic lithotripsy can be operated according to the characteristics of the human body's natural cavity and low wound surface.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the Mechanism of Ureproofing Technology and Postlaparoscopy on Patients with Urology and Infection

Chen

¹

,

Zhang

²

,

Shen

³

et al. 2022

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To analyze the effect of ureteroscopy and retrolaparoscopy on urinary calculi and infection. Method. A total of 64 patients with urinary calculi and infection who received treatment in our hospital from June 2018 to January 2018 were selected. According to the different treatment methods, they were divided into two groups: a control group and a study group. The study group was treated with laparoscopic ureteroscopy, and the control group was treated with ureteroscopy. The surgical results, complications, renal function, stress response, and inflammatory reaction were compared between the two groups. Results. Compared with the control group, the study group stone clearance rate was higher, the surgical time was shorter P < 0.05 ; the incidence of complications in the study group (23.3%) was lower than that in the control group (5.9%) P < 0.05 ; there was no significant difference in kidney function indicators before treatment P > 0.05 ; after treatment, the SCR, BUN, NGAL, and Cys-C indicators of the two groups were significantly increased. Compared with the control group, the study group change was more obvious, and the difference was statistically significant P < 0.05 ; after treatment, the two sets of stress response indicators were significantly increased, but relative to the control group, the study group stress response indicator was lower P < 0.05 ; before treatment, there was no significant difference in inflammatory factors P > 0.05 ; after treatment, the two sets of inflammatory factor levels were significantly increased, but relative to the control group, the study group was lower P < 0.05 . Conclusion. In the clinical treatment of urinary stones, ureteroscopy technology and the laparoscopic technique have played an important role. But the laparoscopic technique is shorter, the stone clearance is higher, and the patient’s renal function can be improved, and the patient is postoperative. The stress reaction should be small. Therefore, in the clinical treatment of urinary stones and infection, laparoscopic technical treatment is worth promoting.

show abstract

“…The so-called posterior peritoneal cavity is not a truly anatomical cavity. In the retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery, a certain pressure of CO2 gas is injected into the posterior peritoneal cavity based on the patient's lateral folding position, and a potential cavity is opened for surgical operation [38]. Three special points of retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery: lateral position, folding position, and CO2 pneumoperitoneum.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Pressure-Controlled Ventilation with Volume Guarantee and Volume-Controlled Ventilation mode in Patients under Laparoscopic Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

X¹,

X²,

Jiang³

et al. 2019

Preprint

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background：In traditional Volume-Controlled Ventilation (VCV) mode, the creation of pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic surgery may lead to Ventilator-Associated Lung Injury (VALI). Pressure-Controlled Ventilation with Volume Guarantee (PCV-VG) mode ensures providing adequate oxygen supply to patients while reducing the risk of lung injury. Methods：Eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were searched in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Sino Med, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wan-Fang MED without language restriction up to March 2019. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was airway peak pressure (Ppeak) at 30, 60 or 90 mins after complete CO2 insufflation. This meta-analysis was followed the recommendations of the PRISMA statement. Results：Finally, 9 articles were included. The Ppeak in the PCV-VG group was lower than that in the VCV group, and the difference was statistically significant at 30mins [Mean Difference (MD)= -3.55, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)= -5.13 to -1.98, I2=83%], 60mins [MD= -5.76, 95%CI= -8.15-3.36, I2=93%], 90 mins [MD= -4.59, 95%CI= -5.43-3.74, I2=30%] after complete CO2 insufflation. Meanwhile, PCV-VG mode could effectively reduce airway mean pressure (Pmean) and improve dynamic compliance (Cdyn) of patients after complete CO2 insufflation in laparoscopic surgery compared to VCV mode. However, no significant difference was found in PetCO2, HR, MAP, PH, PaO2, and PaCO2 between the two-ventilation modes. Conclusions: PCV-VG mode are superior to VCV mode in providing adequate oxygenation at lower airway peak pressure and greater dynamic compliance in patients under laparoscopic surgery.

show abstract

“…Not only in the benign renal diseases, in the comparative study of transpetitoneal vs retroperitoneal radical nephrectomy conducted by Desai et al 10 also concluded that the retroperitoneal approach had shorter time for renal vascular control and shorter total operative time (207 vs 150 minutes; P =0 .001). In recent systematic review in retroperitoneoscopy in urology, Lombardo R and collegue 11 concluded that retroperitoneoscopic approach in urological diseases is a valid alternative to the transperitoneal approach and evidence suggest lower morbidity for the retroperitoneoscopic approach however technical complexity may limit its widespread. In our series, the last two cases were performed using harmonic scalpel replacing bipolar Maryland dissector for kidney dissection, which resulted in significant decrease in the operating time and found significant decrease in operative time.…”

Section: Initial Experience Of Retroperitoneoscopic Surgery In Benignmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initial Experience of Retroperitoneoscopic Surgery in Benign Renal Diseases

Kunwar¹,

Upadhyay²,

Shrestha³

et al. 2019

J Nepal Health Res Counc

1

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To review our early experience to determine the feasibility, efficacy and clinical outcomes of retroperitoneoscopic surgery in benign renal diseases.Methods: This is a prospective observational study carried out between December 2014 to March 2018. Among 14 patients enrolled in the study, 9 cases of nonfunctioning kidney underwent retroperitoneoscopic simple nephrectony, 4 cases of benign renal cortical cysts underwent decortication of cysts and one case of pelviureteric junction obstruction underwent Anderson Hynes pyeloplasty. Results: Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy, renal cyst decortication and A-H pyeloplasty were performed in 13 patients successfully. The procedure in one patient of RP nephrectomy converted to open surgery due to dense perinephric and hilar adhesions. Which resulted to failure to progress. The mean operative time of RP nephrectomy, decortications and pyeloplasty were 206.4 (150-248), 67.5 (60-80) and 275 minutes, average blood loss was 96.7 (50-120), 27.5 (20-30) and 70 ml, and the mean hospital stay were 3.5 (3-4), 2 (2-2) and 4 days respectively. The perioperative period was uneventful.Conclusions: Retroperitoneoscopic surgery is feasible and safe in benign renal diseases. Because of reduced post operative pain and less chances of bowel injury, retroperitoneoscopic surgery is gaining more popularity.Keywords: Nonfunctioning kidney; pyeloplasty; renal cyst; retroperitoneoscopic surgery.

show abstract

Retroperitoneoscopy in urology: a systematic review

Cited by 14 publications

References 29 publications

Analysis of the Mechanism of Ureproofing Technology and Postlaparoscopy on Patients with Urology and Infection

Analysis of the Mechanism of Ureproofing Technology and Postlaparoscopy on Patients with Urology and Infection

Comparison of Pressure-Controlled Ventilation with Volume Guarantee and Volume-Controlled Ventilation mode in Patients under Laparoscopic Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Initial Experience of Retroperitoneoscopic Surgery in Benign Renal Diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About