Intact Specimen Extraction in Laparoscopic Nephrectomy Procedures: Pfannenstiel Versus Expanded Port Site Incisions
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic nephrectomy is considered the standard of care for most Stage T1 and T2 renal tumors. Most centers perform intact extraction rather than morcellation. The extraction incision location varies, with no consensus on the best site. We compared the operative and perioperative parameters after transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures with intact specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel (PFN) or expanded port site (EPS) incision. METHODS: The consecutive charts of 150 patients (March 2001 to October 2003) undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN), laparoscopic nephroureterectomy, or laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with intact specimen extraction were reviewed. The specimens were extracted by way of a PFN or an EPS incision. Two analyses were completed. The first included only LRN, and the second included LRN, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy, and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. RESULTS: In the LRN-only analysis, the PFN group had a shorter hospital stay (2.84 versus 3.37 days, P <0.05). This group also used significantly less morphine (23.7 versus 47.3 mg, P <0.006). The PFN group in the second analysis also used less morphine (26.3 versus 51.1 mg, P <0.002). Four extraction site complications were found; 1 patient in the PFN group developed cellulitis, and 3 patients in the EPS group developed an incisional hernia. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence suggests reduced morbidity with intact specimen extraction through a PFN incision compared with an EPS incision during laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures. Our practice has been modified on the basis of these data, and all specimens are now removed through a PFN incision when suitable. Urologists should consider PFN incisions for specimen extraction with laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures.
