<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="other" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Cancer Urology</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Cancer Urology</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Онкоурология</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">1726-9776</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">1996-1812</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Publishing House ABV Press</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">1254</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17650/1726-9776-2007-0-2-12-17</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF URINARY SYSTEM TUMORS. RENAL CANCER</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ДИАГНОСТИКА И ЛЕЧЕНИЕ ОПУХОЛЕЙ МОЧЕПОЛОВОЙ СИСТЕМЫ. Рак почки</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject></subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Comparative assessment of the results of open-, laparoscopic-, and laparoscopically assisted radical nephrectomies</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Сравнительная оценка результатов радикальных нефрэктомий, выполненных открытым, лапароскопическим и лапароскопически ассистированным доступами</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Teodorovich</surname><given-names>O. V.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Теодорович</surname><given-names>О. В.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Moscow</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Москва</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Zabrodina</surname><given-names>N. B.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Забродина</surname><given-names>Н. Б.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Moscow</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Москва</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Gallyamov</surname><given-names>E. A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Галлямов</surname><given-names>Э. А.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Moscow</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Москва</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Presnov</surname><given-names>K. S.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Преснов</surname><given-names>К. С.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Moscow</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Москва</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Kvon</surname><given-names>D. A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Квон</surname><given-names>Д. А.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Moscow</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Москва</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Department of Endoscopic Urology, Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Кафедра эндоскопической урологии РМАПО</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2007-06-30" publication-format="electronic"><day>30</day><month>06</month><year>2007</year></pub-date><volume>3</volume><issue>2</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en"/><issue-title xml:lang="ru"/><fpage>12</fpage><lpage>17</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2020-02-27"><day>27</day><month>02</month><year>2020</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2020-02-27"><day>27</day><month>02</month><year>2020</year></date></history><permissions><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://oncourology.abvpress.ru/oncur/article/view/1254">https://oncourology.abvpress.ru/oncur/article/view/1254</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p><bold>Objectives. </bold>To compare the results of traditional open-, laparoscopic-, and laparoscopically assisted radical nephrectomies in the treatment of patients with renal cancer. One of the goals was to define the roll of laparoscopic operations and their advantages over open procedures.</p><p><bold>Subjects and methods. </bold>Seventy-four patients with renal cancer age of 36 to 79 years (mean age 58/7 years) were divided into 3 groups: 1) open radical nephrectomy (n = 32); 2) radical nephrectomy via laparoscopic transabdominal access (n = 17); and 3) radical nephrectomy via laparoscopically assisted access (n = 25). All the patient groups were comparable with regard to the T stage and the size of a tumor.</p><p><bold>Results. </bold>In the open nephrectomy group mean duration of surgery was 152 min; mean blood loss — 264 ml; mean hospital stay — 15.8 days; early postoperative complications were not observed. In the laparoscopic transabdominal surgery, these were 117 min, 138 ml, and 7.5, respectively; early postoperative complications were also absent. In laparoscopically assisted transabdominal access, the duration of an operation was 80 to 300 min (at the stage of procedure mastering) and averaged 123.1 min; blood loss was 50 to 700 ml (mean 228.5 ml). There were no intraoperative complications. The average postoperative hospital stay — 9.4 days.</p><p><bold>Conclusion. </bold>The results of open- and laparoscopic-access nephrectomies are comparable in the duration of an operation, the volume of blood loss, and the presence of intraoperative complications. The parameters of the early and late postoperative periods are also identical. Recovery is shorter when endovideo-assisted interventions are applied.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p><bold>Objectives. </bold>To compare the results of traditional open-, laparoscopic-, and laparoscopically assisted radical nephrectomies in the treatment of patients with renal cancer. One of the goals was to define the roll of laparoscopic operations and their advantages over open procedures.</p><p><bold>Subjects and methods. </bold>Seventy-four patients with renal cancer age of 36 to 79 years (mean age 58/7 years) were divided into 3 groups: 1) open radical nephrectomy (n = 32); 2) radical nephrectomy via laparoscopic transabdominal access (n = 17); and 3) radical nephrectomy via laparoscopically assisted access (n = 25). All the patient groups were comparable with regard to the T stage and the size of a tumor.</p><p><bold>Results. </bold>In the open nephrectomy group mean duration of surgery was 152 min; mean blood loss — 264 ml; mean hospital stay — 15.8 days; early postoperative complications were not observed. In the laparoscopic transabdominal surgery, these were 117 min, 138 ml, and 7.5, respectively; early postoperative complications were also absent. In laparoscopically assisted transabdominal access, the duration of an operation was 80 to 300 min (at the stage of procedure mastering) and averaged 123.1 min; blood loss was 50 to 700 ml (mean 228.5 ml). There were no intraoperative complications. The average postoperative hospital stay — 9.4 days.</p><p><bold>Conclusion. </bold>The results of open- and laparoscopic-access nephrectomies are comparable in the duration of an operation, the volume of blood loss, and the presence of intraoperative complications. The parameters of the early and late postoperative periods are also identical. Recovery is shorter when endovideo-assisted interventions are applied.</p></trans-abstract><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">1. Лопаткин Н.А. Оперативная урология. Л., Медицина; 1986. с. 99.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Лопаткин Н.А. Оперативная урология. Л., Медицина; 1986. с. 99.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">2. Abbou C.C., Cicco A., Gasman D. et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy. J Urol 1999;161:1776—80.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Abbou C.C., Cicco A., Gasman D. et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy. J Urol 1999;161:1776—80.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">3. Clayman R.V., Kavoussi L.R., Soper N.J. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1991;146:278—82.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Clayman R.V., Kavoussi L.R., Soper N.J. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1991;146:278—82.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">4. Coptcoat M.J., Rassweiler J., Wickham J.E.A. et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. In: Proc of the 3rd International Congress for Minimal Invasive Therapy. 1991: abstr D-66.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Coptcoat M.J., Rassweiler J., Wickham J.E.A. et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. In: Proc of the 3rd International Congress for Minimal Invasive Therapy. 1991: abstr D-66.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">5. Cadeddu J.A., Ono Y., Clayman R.V. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell cancer: evalution of efficacy and safety: multicenter experiens. Urology 1998;52:773—7.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Cadeddu J.A., Ono Y., Clayman R.V. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell cancer: evalution of efficacy and safety: multicenter experiens. Urology 1998;52:773—7.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">6. Kontak J.A., Campbell S.C. Prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am 2003;30(3):467—80.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kontak J.A., Campbell S.C. Prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am 2003;30(3):467—80.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">7. Permpongkosol S., Chan D.Y., Link R.E. et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Long-term outcomes. J Endourol 2005;19(6):628—33.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Permpongkosol S., Chan D.Y., Link R.E. et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Long-term outcomes. J Endourol 2005;19(6):628—33.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list></back></article>
