Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Urologe A. 2012 May;51(5):658-65. doi: 10.1007/s00120-012-2862-1.

[Nephrectomy - pro laparoscopic].

[Article in German]

Author information

1
Universitätsklinik und Poliklinik für Urologie und Nierentransplantation, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Straße 40, 06120 Halle, Deutschland. rhoda@ucsd.edu

Abstract

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) is considered as a standard of care for T2 renal masses and T1 tumors not treatable by nephron-sparing surgery. It can be performed transperitoneally, retroperitoneoscopic or hand-assisted. However, the morbidity after laparoscopic nephrectomy has been shown to be lower than the open procedure and patients seem to benefit from early mobilization, less pain medication, shorter hospital stays and an earlier return to normal daily activities. Furthermore, the extent of perioperative activation of the systemic stress response appears to be less during laparoscopic procedures. This has been shown to have evidently beneficial clinical impact on patient's recovery; however, its importance for the oncologic prognosis is somewhat unclear. In addition, the progression-free and overall tumor-specific survival rates for laparoscopic nephrectomy are equivalent to those for open surgery. The experiences with robot-assistance for laparoscopic nephrectomy reported so far show no significant advantages over traditional laparoscopic nephrectomy. However, the problem of high costs of acquisition and operation of robots still remains unsolved. For the future, prospective studies are needed in order to compare the functional and oncological outcomes and cost-effectiveness of different methods of radical nephrectomy.

PMID:
22526177
DOI:
10.1007/s00120-012-2862-1
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Springer
    Loading ...
    Support Center