Ordu Üniversitesi olarak ilk 30 vakalık laparoskopik deneyimlerimiz
SB-ODÜ Eğitim Araştırma Hastanesinde yapılan ilk laparoskopik ameliyatların sonuçlarını sunmak ve bu süreçte edindiğimiz tecrübeyi bu işe yeni başlayacak kliniklerle paylaşmaktır.
Our experience of the first 30 laparoscopic cases in Ordu University
Aim: We aim to present the results of the first laparoscopic surgeries at SB-ODU Education and Research Hospital and to share our experience from this process with clinics about to begin laparoscopic procedures. Material and Method: From January 2014 to September 2016, 30 cases undergoing the first laparoscopic procedures at our clinic were retrospectively investigated in terms of age, surgical duration, amount of bleeding, drain duration, hospital stay and complications. The laparoscopic interventions were all completed with the transabdominal method. Results: A total of 30 patients underwent laparoscopic procedures; 8 for nephrectomy, 3 for adrenalectomy, 10 for UPJ stenosis and 9 for renal cyst. The mean surgical duration (mean±SD) was 149.3±42.1 minutes for nephrectomy, 190±45.8 minutes for adrenalectomy, 201±40.6 minutes for UPJ and 96.6±53 minutes for renal cyst. The procedure was completed with open surgery for 4 (13.3%) patients. No patient had vascular damage or organ injury. No patient required blood transfusion in the per-op period. Drains were removed in 2.6 ± 2.3 (1-14) days. The mean stay in hospital was 2.8 ± 1.0 (1-7) days. Conclusion: Laparoscopic procedures are commonly performed today and have replaced open surgery for many surgical procedures. However, it has a longer learning duration compared to open surgery and requires greater effort. We believe that laparoscopy is a viable procedure for urologists with sufficient ambition who have completed the required training programs
___
- 1. Nadu A, Mor Y, Chen J, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial experience in Israel with 110 cases. Isr Med Assoc J 2005;7:431-4.
- 2. Schuessler WW, Vancaillie TG, Reich H, et al. Transperitoneal endosurgical lymphadenectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 1991;145:988-91.
- 3. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case retrokar. J Urol 1991;146:278-82.
- 4. Şahin S, Aras B, Ekşi M, et al.Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy. JSLS 2016;20.
- 5. Rassweiler J. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is also oncologically safe and effective! BJU Int 2013l;112:158.
- 6. Trokaris AJ, Yan Y, Landman J, et al. Long-term followup after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol 2002;167:1257- 62.
- 7. Harano M, Eto M, Yokomizo A, et al. The efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell cancer in the elderly: an oncological outcome analysis. Int J Urol 2008;15:577-81.
- 8. Türkoğlu AR, Çoban S, Güzelsoy M, ve ark. Transperitoneal Laparoskopik Nefrektomi-İlk Deneyimlerimiz. Üroonkoloji Bülteni 2016;15:8-12.
- 9. Soulie M, Seguin P, Richeux L, et al. Urological complications of laparoscopic surgery: experience with 350 procedures at a single center. J Urol 2001;165:1960-3.
- 10. Demir Ö, Öztürk B, Eğriboyun S, ve ark. Kliniğimizde Laparoskopik Cerrahide İlk Deneyimlerimiz Ve Öğrenme Sü- reci. DEÜ Tıp Fakültesi Derg 2010; 24:105-112.
- 11. Hemal AK, Kumar A, Kumar R, et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a longterm prospective comparison. J Urol 2007;177:862-6.
- 12. Erdogru T, Celik O, Akand M, ve ark. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Impact of the learning curve on positive surgical margins. Arch Esp Urol 2013;66:359-66.
- 13. Gomella LG, Abdel-Meguid TA, Lotfi MA, et al. Laparoscopic urologic surgery outcome assessment. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 1997;7:77-86.
- 14. Rassweiler JJ, Seemann O, Henkel T, et al. Retroperitoneoscopy. Technique and experiences with the first 100 patients. Urologie A 1996;35:185-95.
- 15. Şanlı Ö, Tefik T, Naghiyev R, et al. The impact of laparoscopic fellowship programme on laparoscopic nephrectomy experience: a brief report. Turkish Journal of Urology 2010;36:238-242.