Browsing by Author "Breda, A"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Contemporary urologic minilaparoscopy: indications, techniques, and surgical outcomes in a multi-institutional European cohort.Publication . Porpiglia, F; Autorino, R; Cicione, A; Pagliarulo, V; Falsaperla, M; Volpe, A; Gozen, AS; Celia, A; De Sio, M; Saita, A; Damiano, R; Zacchero, M; Fiori, C; Terrone, C; Bertolo, R; Greco, F; Breda, A; Lima, E; Rassweiler, JOBJECTIVES: To provide an analytical overview of contemporary indications, techniques, and outcomes of urologic minilaparoscopy (ML) in multiple European centers. METHODS: Data of patients who had undergone a minilaparoscopic urologic procedure at nine European institutions between 2009 and 2012 were retrospectively gathered. Surgical procedures were classified as upper or lower urinary tract and as ablative or extirpative and reconstructive. The main surgical outcome parameters were analyzed and relevant operative data related to the surgical technique were recorded. RESULTS: Overall, 192 patients (mean age 45.25±17.8 years) were included in the analysis. Most of them were nonobese (mean body mass index [BMI] 24.7±3.6 kg/m(2)) at low estimated surgical risk (mean American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] 1.69±0.68). Indications for surgery were mostly nononcologic (132 cases, 68.8%). Most of the procedures were done in the upper urinary tract (133 cases, 69.2%) and were mostly with a reconstructive intent (109 cases, 56.7%). Overall operative time was 132.7±52.3 minutes with an estimated blood loss of 60.9±47.6 mL while the mean hospital stay was 5±2.1 days. Most of the postoperative complications were low Clavien grade (1 and 2), with only one (0.5%) grade 3 and one (0.5%) grade 4 complications recorded. CONCLUSIONS: A broad range of common procedures can be safely and effectively performed with ML techniques. By duplicating the principles of standard laparoscopy, but potentially offering less surgical scar and trauma, ML can be regarded as a viable option when looking for a virtually "scarless" surgery.
- Three-dimensional vs standard laparoscopy: comparative assessment using a validated program for laparoscopic urologic skillsPublication . Cicione, A; Autorino, R; Breda, A; De Sio, M; Damiano, R; Fusco, F; Greco, F; Carvalho-Dias, E; Mota, P; Nogueira, C; Pinho, P; Mirone, V; Correia-Pinto, J; Rassweiler, J; Lima, EOBJECTIVE: To compare the last generation of 3-dimensional imaging (3D) vs standard 2-dimensional imaging (2D) laparoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted during the 4th Minimally Invasive Urological Surgical Week Course held in Braga (Portugal) in April 2013. The course participants and faculty were asked to perform standardized tasks in the dry laboratory setting and randomly assigned into 2 study groups; one starting with 3D, the other with 2D laparoscopy. The 5 tasks of the European Training in Basic Laparoscopic Urological Skills were performed. Time to complete each task and errors made were recorded and analyzed. An end-of-study questionnaire was filled by the participants. RESULTS: Ten laparoscopic experts and 23 laparoscopy-naïve residents were included. Overall, a significantly better performance was obtained using 3D in terms of time (1115 seconds, interquartile range [IQR] 596-1469 vs 1299 seconds, IQR 620-1723; P = .027) and number of errors (2, IQR 1-3 vs 3, IQR 2-5.5; P = .001). However, the experts were faster only in the "peg transfer" task when using the 3D, whereas naïves improved their performance in 3 of the 5 tasks. A linear correlation between level of experience and performance was found. Three-dimensional imaging was perceived as "easier" by a third of the laparoscopy-naïve participants (P = .027). CONCLUSION: Three-dimensional imaging seems to facilitate surgical performance of urologic surgeons without laparoscopic background in the dry laboratory setting. The advantage provided by 3D for those with previous laparoscopic experience remains to be demonstrated. Further studies are needed to determine the actual advantage of 3D over standard 2D laparoscopy in the clinical setting.