Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Adicionar filtros








Intervalo de ano
1.
São Paulo med. j ; 142(3): e2022488, 2024. tab, graf
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1530518

RESUMO

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is often regarded as the preferred therapy for end-stage renal disease. Several surgical procedures have been developed to reduce postoperative donor complications, while maintaining kidney quality. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the preoperative and postoperative outcomes of living kidney donors who underwent either transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy or open nephrectomy. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective study conducted in Istanbul, Turkey. METHODS: Fifty-five living-related kidney donors underwent nephrectomy and were retrospectively divided into two groups: 21 donors who underwent open nephrectomy (Group 1) and 34 donors who underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy (Group 2). RESULTS: In comparison to the donors who underwent open nephrectomy, those who underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy had significantly shorter postoperative hospital stays (2.3 ± 0.2 versus 3.8 ± 0.8 days, P = 0.003), duration of urinary catheterization (1.2 ± 0.8 days versus 2.0 ± 0.7 days, P = 0.0001), operating times (210 ± 27 minutes versus 185 ± 24 minutes, P = 0.02), and less blood loss (86 ml versus 142 ml, P = 0.048). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups with regard to the estimated blood transfusion and warm ischemia time. The preoperative week, first postoperative week, and 1-month postoperative serum creatinine levels were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy can be safely performed at centers with expertise in laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has better outcomes than open donor nephrectomy in terms of length of hospital stay, duration of urinary catheterization, operating time, and blood loss.

2.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 41(4): 744-749, July-Aug. 2015. tab
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS | ID: lil-763053

RESUMO

ABSTRACTBackground and aims:To investigate the possible effect of resectoscope size on urethral stricture rate after monopolar TURP.Materials and Methods:A retrospective study of 71 men undergoing TURP was conducted at two centers’ from November 2009 to May 2013. The patients were divided into one of two groups according to the resectoscope diameter used for TURP. Resectoscope diameter was 24 F in group 1 (n=35) or 26 F in group 2 (n=36). Urethral catheter type, catheter removal time and energy type were kept constant for all patients. Urethral stricture formation in different localizations after TURP was compared between groups.Results:There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, pre-operative prostate gland volume (PV), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), maximal urinary flow rates (Qmax), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and post-voiding residual urine volume (PVR). The resection time and weight of resected prostate tissue were similar for both groups (p>0.05). A statistically significant higher incidence of bulbar stricture was detected in group 2 compared to group1 (p=0.018).Conclusions:The use of small-diameter resectoscope shafts may cause a reduction in the incidence of uretral strictures in relation to urethral friction and mucosal damage.


Assuntos
Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Endoscópios/efeitos adversos , Próstata/patologia , Hiperplasia Prostática/cirurgia , Ressecção Transuretral da Próstata/instrumentação , Estreitamento Uretral/etiologia , Desenho de Equipamento , Seguimentos , Fricção , Mucosa/lesões , Duração da Cirurgia , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangue , Qualidade de Vida , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Ressecção Transuretral da Próstata/efeitos adversos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA