首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endourology >Is robot-assisted radical cystectomy justified in the elderly? a comparison of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in elderly ≥75 years old
【24h】

Is robot-assisted radical cystectomy justified in the elderly? a comparison of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in elderly ≥75 years old

机译:机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术在老年人中是否合理?机器人和开放性膀胱癌切除术对75岁以上老年人膀胱癌的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background and Purpose: Open radical cystectomy (ORC) or minimally invasive radical cystectomy with pelvic lymph node (LN) dissection carries significant morbidity to the elderly because they often have several medical comorbidities that make a surgical approach more challenging. The objective of this study is to compare robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and ORC in elderly patients. Patients and Methods: A prospective bladder cancer cystectomy database was queried to identify all patients age ≥75 years. A total of 20 patients were identified for each of the RARC and ORC cohorts. A retrospective analysis was performed on these 40 patients undergoing radical cystectomy for curative intent. Results: Patients in both groups had comparable preoperative characteristics and demographics. Patients had significant medical comorbidities with 80% in each cohort having American Society of anesthesiologists classification of 3 and 50% having had previous abdominal surgery. Complete median operative times for RARC was 461 (interquartile range [IQR] 331, 554) vs 370 minutes for ORC (IQR 294, 460) (P=0.056); however, median blood loss for RARC was 275mL (IQR 150, 450) vs 600mL for ORC (IQR 500, 1925). The median hospital stay for RARC was 7 days (IQR 5, 8) vs 14.5 days for ORC (IQR 8, 22) (P<0.001). The major complication (Clavien≥III) rate for RARC was 10% compared with 35% for ORC (P=0.024). There were two positive margins in the ORC group compared with one in the RARC group with median LN yields of 15 nodes (IQR 11, 22) and 17 nodes (IQR 10, 25) (P=0.560) respectively. Conclusions: In a comparable cohort of elderly patients, RARC can achieve similar perioperative outcomes without compromising pathologic outcomes, with less blood loss and shorter hospital stays. For an experienced robotic team, RARC should be considered in elderly patients because it may offer significant advantage with respect to perioperative morbidity over ORC.
机译:背景与目的:进行根治性开放性膀胱切除术(ORC)或盆腔淋巴结清扫术(LN)的微创性根治性膀胱切除术对老年人具有明显的发病率,因为他们经常患有多种合并症,这使得手术方法更具挑战性。本研究的目的是比较老年患者的机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术(RARC)和ORC。患者和方法:查询前瞻性膀胱癌膀胱切除术数据库,以识别所有年龄≥75岁的患者。对于RARC和ORC队列中的每个队列,总共确定了20名患者。对这40例行根治性膀胱切除术治疗的患者进行了回顾性分析。结果:两组患者的术前特征和人口统计学均相当。患者有明显的合并症,每组有80%的美国麻醉医师学会分类为3,有50%的曾接受过腹部手术。 RARC的完整中位手术时间为461(四分位间距[IQR] 331,554),而ORC的完整中位手术时间为370分钟(IQR 294、460)(P = 0.056);但是,RARC的中位数失血量为275mL(IQR 150,450),而ORC的中位数失血量为600mL(IQR 500,1925)。 RARC的中位住院时间为7天(IQR 5,8),而ORC的中位住院时间为14.5天(IQR 8,22)(P <0.001)。 RARC的主要并发症(Clavien≥III)发生率为10%,而ORC的为35%(P = 0.024)。与RARC组中的一个相比,ORC组中有两个正边距,LN产量的中值分别为15个节点(IQR 11,22)和17个节点(IQR 10,25)(P = 0.560)。结论:在相当大的老年患者队列中,RARC可以达到类似的围手术期结果,而不会损害病理结果,减少失血量并缩短住院时间。对于经验丰富的机器人团队,应考虑在老年患者中使用RARC,因为相对于ORC,它在围手术期发病率方面可能具有明显优势。

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