Comparison of Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy with Open Adrenalectomy for Adrenal Tumor.
- Author:
Jin Chul KIM
1
;
Young Up CHO
;
Kang Yeun LEE
;
Jang Yong KIM
;
Yun Mee CHOE
;
Sun Keun CHOI
;
Yoon Seok HUR
;
Keon Young LEE
;
Sei Joong KIM
;
Seung Ik AHN
;
Kee Chun HONG
;
Seok Hwan SHIN
;
Kyung Rae KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea. youngup@inha.edu
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Laparoscopic adrenalectomy;
Open adrenalectomy;
Adrenal neoplasm
- MeSH:
Adrenal Gland Neoplasms;
Adrenalectomy;
Anesthesia;
Humans;
Length of Stay;
Operative Time;
Retrospective Studies
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Endoscopic & Laparoscopic Surgeons
2009;12(2):123-128
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The definite indications of laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) and the limitations of minimally invasive surgery have yet to be determined. To verify the benefit and safety of LA, we compared the results of LA with those of open adrenalectomy (OA) and we further analyzed the clinical results of LA in accordance with the time period of performing this surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 69 patients who received adrenalectomy between 1997 and 2008. We compared LA with OA. The LA was divided into subsets of the early and late groups, and the transperitoneal approach and retroperitoneal approach groups, and we compared and analyzed the results of each group, along with the results of the OA and LA groups. For each of the groups, we analyzed the following factors; age, gender, tumor size, tumor location, the operative time, the time under anesthesia, the amounts of blood loss and transfusion, the time to first oral intake, the length of the postoperative hospital stay and the complications. RESULTS: LA (25 cases), as compared to OA (20 cases), showed better results for the amount of transfusion, the time to first oral intake, the length of the postoperative hospital stay and the complication rates (p=0.032; p=0.017; p=0.02). As for CA (4 cases), the time to first oral intake and the length of the postoperative hospital stay were significantly longer than that of LA (p=0.001; p=0.021). LA done in the late period demonstrated less blood loss and a shorter time to first oral intake as compared to the LA of the early period (p=0.032; p=0.019). There were no significant statistical differences between the results of the peritoneal or retroperitoneal approaches. CONCLUSION: LA has the merits of a shortening hospital stay and decreased complication. Furthermore, as the experience with this type of surgery accumulates, these merits are likely to become stronger. Thus, surgeons are expected to carefully decide on choosing the surgical methods by fully understanding the benefits and indications of LA.
