RETROPERITONEOSCOPY

Česká verzia

Authors: T. Frede; A. Goezem; J. Rassweiler; D. Teber
Authors place of work: HELIOS-Klinik Müllheim ; Dept. of Urology
Published in the journal: Urol List 2010; 8(1): 58-60

Summary

Retroperitoneoscopic surgery is technically demanding and should be learned within a validated training programme. If some principles of retroperitoneoscopy such as anatomy, exposure of structures, wide rather than deep dissection and good visualization are considered the complication rate can be reduced significantly. In case of adrenelactomy the posterior retroperitoneoscopic approach can be favourable in selected cases.

Key words:
landmarks, lateral approach, posterior approach

Zdroje

1. Bartel M. Die Retroperitoneoskopie. Eine endoskopische Methode zur Inspektion und bioptischen Untersuchung des retroperitonealen Raumes Zentralbl Chir 1969; 94: 377–383.

2. Wittmoser R. Die Retroperitoneoskopie als neue Methode der lumbalen Sympathikotomie Fortschr Endosk 1973; 4: 219–223.

3. Wickham J. The surgical treatment of renal lithiasis. In: Wickham J, editor. Urinary calculous disease. New York Churchill-Livingstone 1979; 145–198.

4. Gaur DD. Laparoscopic operative retroperitoneoscopy: Use of a new device. J Urol 1992; 148(4): 1137–1139.

5. Rassweiler J, Henkel T, Potempa D et al. The technique of transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy, adrenalectomy and nephroureterectomy. Eur Urol 1993; 23(4): 425–430.

6. Rassweiler J, Henkel T, Stock C et al. Retro peritoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy and other procedures in the upper retroperitoneum using a balloon dissection technique. Eur Urol 1994; 25(3): 229–236.

7. Teber D, Tefekli A, Eskicorapci S et al. Retroperitoneoscopy: a versatile access for many urologic indications. Eur Urol 2006; 5: 975–982.

8. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Frede T. Complications of laparoscopic pyeloplasty. World J Urol 2008; 26(6): 539–547.

9. Perrier N, Kennamer D, Bao R et al. Posterior retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: preferred technique for removal of benign tumors and isolated metastases. Ann Surg 2008; 248(4): 666–674.

10. Walz M, Alesina P, Wenger F et al. Posterior retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy – results of 560 procedures in 520 patients. Surgery 2006; 140(6): 943–948.

11. Walz M, Peitgen K, Hoermann R et al. Posterior retroperitoneoscopy as a new minimally invasive approach for adrenalectomy: results of 30 adrenalectomies in 27 patients. World J Surg 1996; 20(7): 769–774.

12. Walz M, Alesina P. Single access retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy (SARA) – one step beyond in endocrine surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2008; Epub ahead of print.

13. Takashi Y, Fumio I, Ishikawa N et al. Retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: lateral versus posterior approach. J Endourol 2004; 18(7): 661–664.

14. Agha A, von Breitenbuch P, Gahli N et al. Retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: lateral versus dorsal approach. J Surg Oncol 2008; 97(1): 90–93.

15. Barczynski M, Konturek A, Golkowski F et al. Posterior Retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: a comparison between the initial experience in the invention phase and introductory phase of the new surgical technique. Worl J Surg 2007; 31(1): 65–71.

16. Desai M, Strzempkowski B, Matin S et al. Prospective randomised comparison of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol 2005; 173: 38–41.

17. Ng C, Gill I, Ramani A et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: patient selection and perioperative outcomes. J Urol 2005; 174(3): 846–849.

18. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Frede T. Complications of laparoscopic pyeloplasty. World J Urol 2008; 26(6): 539–547.

19. Sugiono M, Teber D, Anghel G et al. Assessing the predictive validity and efficacy of a multimodal training programme for laparoscopic radical pros tatectomy. Eur Urol 2007; 51(5): 1332–1340.