| Objective: To evaluation the feasibility and efficacy of the laparoscopic partialnephrectomy for treatment of renal tumors，by comparison with laparoscopic partialnephrectomy and open partial nephrectomy。Methods: Between September2007and December2011，Date on85caseslaparoscopic or open partial nephrectomy were collected retrospectively in renaltumor at the Union Hospital of Fujian Medical University，including laparoscopicgroup25cases and open group60cases. Operating time, ischemia time, operativeblood loss, postoperative hospitalization time, intestinal recovery time, the time ofdrainage, total cost, complications and follow date were compared between the twogroups.Results: There were no significance in age, gender, tumor size, ASA score, bodymass index, tumor location, preoperative creatinine (P>0.05). Compared with OPN,LPN operative time, operative blood loss, the time of drainage and total cost issimilar (133.8±58.87min vs136.5±32.54min,129.60±178.62ml vs214.0±339.93ml,5.48±1.58d vs8.02±11.45d,31242.24±15733.47vs28766.80±10445.26, P>0.05). Surgical complications for laparoscopic group16%and opengroup11.67%, p=0.724. LPN group compared with OPN group, LPN has a longerischemia time (29.2±4.09min vs19.68±5.54min, p <0.001), more shortpostoperative hospitalization time (10.4±6.42d vs16.67±7.88d, p=0.001) andintestinal recovery time (49.86±20.04h vs73.87±28.40h, p <0.0001). And3months of follow-up found no significant difference in serum creatinine, althoughLPN group creatinine rate was higher (8.8±6.44%vs6.19±4.85%, p=0.044).With LPN, no patient had positive margins or tumor local recurrence. No distanttumor metastasis rate was96%and100%, p=0.294.Conclusion: Compared with OPN，LPN is also treating renal tumor as a safeand effective operation. At the same time LPN has a shorter time in the intestinal surgery and recovery time, although have a longer ischemia time. Between the twogroups the no local recurrence and the distant metastasis is similar. |
PDF Full Text Request