首页> 外文期刊>World journal of urology >Minimal incision living donor nephrectomy compared to the hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.
【24h】

Minimal incision living donor nephrectomy compared to the hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.

机译:与手助腹腔镜活体供肾切除术相比,最​​小切口活体供肾切除术。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND. There has been a surge of minimally invasive procedures for living donor nephrectomy. We compared our minimal incision living donor (MILD) nephrectomy to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) living donor nephrectomy METHODS. We conducted a Medline search and compared our first 45 MILD nephrectomies to the data from the University of Michigan (UM), Tulane University (TU), and the University of Chicago (UC). RESULTS. The MILD incision was smaller than the cumulative incisions in the UM and UC groups (8.6, 11 and 10.4 cm, respectively). The operating times were similar in the UM and UC groups (209, 246, and 215 min, respectively). The UM and TU lengths of hospital stay (1.8 and 2.2 days) were shorter than those of the MILD and UC groups (2.5 and 2.8 days). CONCLUSIONS. MILD nephrectomy has results similar to those of HAL living donor nephrectomy. It allows the surgeon with a traditionally trained background to perform a safe, minimally invasive operation without laparoscopic technology.
机译:背景。活体供体肾切除术的微创手术激增。我们将我们的最小切口活体供体(MILD)肾切除术与手助腹腔镜(HAL)活体供体肾切除术方法进行了比较。我们进行了Medline搜索,并将前45个MILD肾直肠癌与密歇根大学(UM),杜兰大学(TU)和芝加哥大学(UC)的数据进行了比较。结果。 MILD切口小于UM和UC组的累积切口(分别为8.6、11和10.4 cm)。 UM和UC组的工作时间相似(分别为209、246和215分钟)。住院时间的UM和TU长度(1.8天和2.2天)比MILD和UC组(2.5天和2.8天)短。结论。 MILD肾切除术的结果与HAL活体供体肾切除术的结果相似。它使具有传统训练背景的外科医生无需进行腹腔镜技术即可执行安全,微创的手术。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号