Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Retroperitoneoscopy.

Authors: A, Mandressi; C, Buizza; D, Antonelli; S, Chisena; G, Servadio;

Retroperitoneoscopy.

Abstract

From October 1992 to June 1994, 12 nephrectomies (all for benign diseases), one nephropexy and 7 adrenalectomies (one pheochromocitoma, three adenomas, one cyst) were performed. In all the cases the retroperitoneal working space was created with direct CO2 insufflation (without balloon) with the patient in prone position. Four 10-12 mm ports were always inserted in the lumbar area. Eighteen procedures were successful (90%), 2 failed (one nephrectomy and one adrenalectomy) and underwent open surgery. Twelve procedures were carried out with the patients in prone position, six (one nephropexy and 5 nephrectomies) were performed with the patients in lateral de cubitus. The removal of organs was managed either through an enlarged port (phi 2 cm.) or by joining vertically the stabs of the two ports lateral to the sarcospinalis muscle. The average operative time was 4.10 hours) range 2.30-5.20). Both CO2 absorption and blood loss were negligible. No major complications were observed. Postoperative pain never required medications. All patients were able to stand on the 1st postoperative day. Mean postoperative hospitalisation was 4 days. Direct retroperitoneal approach provides optimal access for laparoscopic renal, proximal ureteral and adrenal surgery, avoiding extensive dissection and handling of intraperitoneal structures.

Keywords

Adenoma, Adult, Male, Posture, Adrenal Gland Neoplasms, Blood Loss, Surgical, Adrenalectomy, Insufflation, Pheochromocytoma, Carbon Dioxide, Length of Stay, Middle Aged, Nephrectomy, Absorption, Prone Position, Humans, Female, Kidney Diseases, Laparoscopy, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    31
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
31
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!