...
首页> 外文期刊>BJU international >Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy and various radical prostatectomy techniques: Is pelvic drainage necessary?
【24h】

Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy and various radical prostatectomy techniques: Is pelvic drainage necessary?

机译:扩大盆腔淋巴结清扫术和各种前列腺癌根治术:是否需要盆腔引流?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The occurence of lymphoceles in patients after radical prostatectomy is well known (2-10%). It appears that patients undergoing open extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy develop more lymphoceles than patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with transperitoneal access. The present study investigates in a prospective randomized manner whether the time of drainage (1 vs 7 days) makes a difference or whether drainage is even necessary. The study data, collected in the same institution, are compared with the incidence of lymphocele in patients treated by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Objective To investigate whether routine drainage is advisable after open extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) by measuring the incidence of lymphoceles and comparing these results with those of a series of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and ePLND. Patients and Methods A total of 331 consecutive patients underwent ePLND and RRP or RARP. The first 132 patients underwent open ePLND and RRP and received two pelvic drains; these patients were prospectively randomized into two groups: group 1 (n = 66), in which the drains were shortened on postoperative (PO) days 3 and 5 and removed on PO day 7, and group 2 (n = 66), in which the drains were removed on PO day 1. The next 199 patients were assigned to two consecutive groups not receiving drainage: group 3 (n = 73) undergoing open ePLND and RRP, followed by group 4 (n = 126) treated by transperitoneal robot-assisted ePLND and RARP. All patients had ultrasonographic controls 5 and 10 days and 3 and 12 months after surgery. Results Lymphoceles were detected in 6.6% of all patients, 3.3% of whom were asymptomatic and 3.3% of whom were symptomatic. Symptomatic lymphoceles were detected in 0% of group 1, 8% of group 2, 7% of group 3 and 1% of group 4, with groups 2 and 3 differing significantly from group 4 (P < 0.05). In total, 5% of all patients undergoing open RRP (groups 1-3) had symptomatic lymphoceles vs 1% of patients undergoing RARP (group 4) (P = 0.06). Nodal-positive patients had significantly more symptomatic lymphoceles than nodal-negative patients (10% vs 2%) (P < 0.02). Conclusions Symptomatic lymphoceles occur less frequently after open RRP and pelvic drainage over 7 days than after open RRP and pelvic drainage over 1 day or without drainage. Patients undergoing RARP without drainage had significantly fewer lymphoceles than patients receiving open RRP without drainage.
机译:关于这个主题有什么了解?该研究增加了什么?众所周知,前列腺癌根治术后患者的淋巴结肿大发生率(2-10%)。似乎接受开放性腹膜外前列腺癌根治术的患者比经机器人辅助经腹膜根治性前列腺癌根治术的患者产生更多的淋巴结肿大。本研究以前瞻性的随机方式调查引流时间(1 vs 7天)是否有所不同,甚至是否有必要引流。将在同一机构收集的研究数据与机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术治疗的患者的淋巴球囊肿发生率进行比较。目的通过测量淋巴膨出的发生率,并将这些结果与一系列机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)的结果进行比较,以探讨开放性扩展盆腔淋巴结清扫术(ePLND)和耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术(RRP)后是否应进行常规引流。 ePLND。患者和方法共有331位连续的患者接受了ePLND和RRP或RARP。前132例患者接受了开放性ePLND和RRP手术,并接受了两次盆腔引流。这些患者前瞻性地分为两组:第一组(n = 66),其中术后3天和术后5天缩短了引流管,在术后7天去除了引流物;第二组(n = 66),其中在第1天的PO上移除引流管。接下来的199例患者被分为两个连续的不接受引流的组:第3组(n = 73)接受开放式ePLND和RRP手术,然后第4组(n = 126)接受经腹膜机器人手术-协助ePLND和RARP。所有患者均在术后5、10天和3、12个月接受超声检查。结果所有患者中有6.6%检出淋巴囊肿,其中无症状的占3.3%,有症状的占3.3%。在第1组的0%,第2组的8%,第3组的7%,第4组的1%中检测到有症状的淋巴囊肿,第2组和第3组与第4组有显着差异(P <0.05)。总的来说,所有接受开放RRP的患者(第1-3组)中有5%有症状性淋巴囊肿,而接受RARP的患者(第4组)中则有1%(P = 0.06)。淋巴结阳性患者的症状性淋巴囊肿明显多于淋巴结阴性患者(10%比2%)(P <0.02)。结论开腹RRP和盆腔引流7天后有症状性淋巴结的发生率比开腹RRP和盆腔引流1天或无引流后少。接受不引流的RARP患者比接受不引流的开放性RRP患者的淋巴结明显减少。

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