RESUMEN
ABSTRACT Objective: To comparatively evaluate the traditional interrupted knot-tying and running suture renorrhaphy with Monocryl® in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 62 consecutive patients undergoing LPN using traditional interrupted knot-tying suture renorrhaphy (Group 1; n=31) or running suture technique renorrhaphy with 2-0 monofilament polyglecaprone (Monocryl®, Ethicon) (Group 2; n=31) from December 2011 to October 2015 at the University. All patients underwent LPN performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. The demographic, perioperative and postoperative parameters were compared between the groups, and the effect of both suture techniques on the warm ischemic time (WIT) and trifecta were evaluated. Results: The running suture renorrhaphy with Monocryl® reduced WIT, estimated blood lost and length of hospitalization stay significantly without increasing postoperative complication rate during LPN in comparison with interrupted knot-tying suture. Conclusion: The renorrhaphy using the running suture with Monocryl® is an effective and safe technique with the advantage of shortening WIT even in more challenging and larger tumors during LPN.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Poliésteres/uso terapéutico , Técnicas de Sutura , Laparoscopía/métodos , Dioxanos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Renales/cirugía , Nefrectomía/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To comparatively evaluate the traditional interrupted knot-tying and running suture renorrhaphy with Monocryl® in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 62 consecutive patients undergoing LPN using traditional interrupted knot-tying suture renorrhaphy (Group 1; n=31) or running suture technique renorrhaphy with 2-0 monofilament polyglecaprone (Monocryl®, Ethicon) (Group 2; n=31) from December 2011 to October 2015 at the University. All patients underwent LPN performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. The demographic, perioperative and postoperative parameters were compared between the groups, and the effect of both suture techniques on the warm ischemic time (WIT) and trifecta were evaluated. RESULTS: The running suture renorrhaphy with Monocryl® reduced WIT, estimated blood lost and length of hospitalization stay significantly without increasing postoperative complication rate during LPN in comparison with interrupted knot-tying suture. CONCLUSION: The renorrhaphy using the running suture with Monocryl® is an effective and safe technique with the advantage of shortening WIT even in more challenging and larger tumors during LPN.
Asunto(s)
Dioxanos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Renales/cirugía , Laparoscopía/métodos , Nefrectomía/métodos , Poliésteres/uso terapéutico , Técnicas de Sutura , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy is well tolerated by patients but the lack of an effective marker to predict pain prevents us from determining pre-procedurally which patient group needs local anesthesia for biopsy and probe pain. Thus in this study, we investigated predictor factors for prostate biopsy and probe insertion pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 71 patients who were undergoing prostate biopsy without anesthesia were included in the study retrospectively. Pain had been assessed with visual analogue scale (VAS 0-10). Digital rectal examination (DRE) pain was analyzed for biopsy and probe insertion pain. RESULTS: DRE pain was related to both probe pain and biopsy pain. CONCLUSION: Although level of pain during DRE determines patients in need of local anesthesia, since the number of patients with moderate-severe pain is rather big, it seems efficient in determining the patients in need of additional anesthesia due to probe pain.
Asunto(s)
Anestesia Local/métodos , Biopsia con Aguja/métodos , Tacto Rectal/efectos adversos , Dolor/prevención & control , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Biopsia con Aguja/efectos adversos , Tacto Rectal/métodos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Bloqueo Nervioso/métodos , Dolor/etiología , Dimensión del Dolor , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , Ultrasonografía IntervencionalRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy is well tolerated by patients but the lack of an effective marker to predict pain prevents us from determining pre-procedurally which patient group needs local anesthesia for biopsy and probe pain. Thus in this study, we investigated predictor factors for prostate biopsy and probe insertion pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 71 patients who were undergoing prostate biopsy without anesthesia were included in the study retrospectively. Pain had been assessed with visual analogue scale (VAS 0-10). Digital rectal examination (DRE) pain was analyzed for biopsy and probe insertion pain. RESULTS: DRE pain was related to both probe pain and biopsy pain. CONCLUSION: Although level of pain during DRE determines patients in need of local anesthesia, since the number of patients with moderate-severe pain is rather big, it seems efficient in determining the patients in need of additional anesthesia due to probe pain.