Development of urologic laparoscopy in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: a survey among urologists

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Florian Imkamp (1)
  Thomas R. W. Herrmann (1)
  Jens U. Stolzenburg (2)
  Jens Rassweiler (3)
  Tullio Sulser (4)
  Uwe Zimmermann (5)
  Sebastian Dziuba (1)
  Markus A. Kuczyk (1)
  Martin Burchardt (5)
  
• 关键词：Laparoscopy ; Survey ; Questionnaire ; Surgical technique ; Practice pattern
• 刊名：World Journal of Urology
• 出版年：2014
• 出版时间：December 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：32
• 期：6
• 页码：1363-1374
• 全文大小：1,671 KB
• 参考文献：1. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ et al (1991) Laparoscopic nephrectomy. N Engl J Med 324(19):1370-371 Epub 1991/05/09
  2. Lane BR, Gill IS (2010) 7-Year oncological outcomes after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. J Urol 183(2):473-79 Epub 2009/12/17 CrossRef
  3. Ljungberg B, Cowan NC, Hanbury DC et al (2010) EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2010 update. Eur Urol 58(3):398-06 Epub 2010/07/17 CrossRef
  4. Hruza M, Weiss HO, Pini G et al (2010) Complications in 2200 consecutive laparoscopic radical prostatectomies: standardised evaluation and analysis of learning curves. Eur Urol 58(5):733-41 Epub 2010/08/31 CrossRef
  5. Busch J, Stephan C, Herold A et al (2012) Long-term oncological and continence outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-centre experience. BJU Int 110(11 Pt C):E985–E990 Epub 2012/06/08 CrossRef
  6. Hoznek A, Menard Y, Salomon L, Abbou CC (2005) Update on laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy. Curr Opin Urol 15(3):173-80 Epub 2005/04/09 CrossRef
  7. Kowalczyk KJ, Yu HY, Ulmer W, Williams SB, Hu JC (2012) Outcomes assessment in men undergoing open retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 30(1):85-9 Epub 2011/03/03 CrossRef
  8. Thorsteinsdottir T, Stranne J, Carlsson S et al (2011) LAPPRO: a prospective multicentre comparative study of robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol 45(2):102-12 Epub 2010/12/01 CrossRef
  9. Liatsikos E, Kallidonis P, Do M, et al (2013) Laparoscopic radical and partial nephrectomy: technical issues and outcome. World J Urol 31(4):785-91. doi:10.1007/s00345-011-0754-4
  10. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 59(1):61-1 Epub 2010/11/09 CrossRef
  11. Caceres F, Cabrera PM, Garcia-Tello A, Garcia-Mediero JM, Angulo JC (2012) Safety study of umbilical single-port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a New DuoRotate System. Eur Urol 62(6):1143-149. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.04.043
  12. Rabenalt R, Arsov C, Giessing M, Winter C, Albers P (2010) Extraperitoneal laparo-endoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy: first experience. World J Urol 28(6):705-08 Epub 2010/03/30 CrossRef
  13. Kumar U, Gill IS (2006) Learning curve in human laparoscopic surgery. Curr Urol Rep 7(2):120-24 Epub 2006/03/11 CrossRef
  14. Secin FP, Savage C, Abbou C et al (2010) The learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an international multicenter study. J Urol 184(6):2291-296 Epub 2010/10/19 CrossRef
  15. Frede T, Erdogru T, Zukosky D, Gulkesen H, Teber D, Rassweiler J (2005) Comparison of training modalities for performing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience with 1,000 patients. J Urol 174(2):673-78. Discussion 8. Epub 2005/07/12
  16. Imkamp F, Herrmann TR, Rassweiler J et al (2009) Laparoscopy in German urology: changing acceptance among urologists. Eur Urol 56(6):1074-080 Epub 2008/10/14 CrossRef
  17. Vogeli TA, Burchardt M, Fornara P, Rassweiler J, Sulser T (2002) Current laparoscopic practice patterns in urology: results of a survey among urologists in Germany and Switzerland. Eur Urol 42(5):441-46 Epub 2002/11/14
• 作者单位：Florian Imkamp (1)
  Thomas R. W. Herrmann (1)
  Jens U. Stolzenburg (2)
  Jens Rassweiler (3)
  Tullio Sulser (4)
  Uwe Zimmermann (5)
  Sebastian Dziuba (1)
  Markus A. Kuczyk (1)
  Martin Burchardt (5)
  
  1. Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany
  2. Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Liebigstra?e 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
  3. Department of Urology, SLK Kliniken Heilbronn, University of Heidelberg, Am Gesundbrunnen 20, 74078, Heilbronn, Germany
  4. Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
  5. Clinic of Urology, University Greifswald, Ferdinand-Sauerbruch-Strasse, 17475, Greifswald, Germany
  
• ISSN：1433-8726

文摘

Purpose Laparoscopy introduction has dramatically changed urology. Novel techniques, such as laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) and natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), might also have substantial influence. This 2012 survey evaluated present laparoscopy use, its appraisal among urologic surgeons, laparoscopy training, and use of new techniques. Results were compared to the previous surveys, demonstrating the 10-year development of laparoscopy. Methods A detailed questionnaire regarding demographic data, laparoscopy use, attitudes concerning laparoscopy, and novel techniques was send to 424 departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Procedures performed in 25 indications were quantitatively evaluated. Results The response rate was 63?% (269). Eighty-six percent of the respondents reported performing laparoscopy, compared to 54?% in 2002. Only 16?% expected economic advantages with laparoscopy, whereas 67?% expected shorter hospitalization. Seventy percent of responders anticipated comparable functional and oncological results between laparoscopic procedures and open surgery. Slow learning curves (81?%) and insufficient training facilities (32?%) were reported to impair laparoscopic surgery. On average, laparoscopic and non-laparoscopic surgical teams consisted of 2.5 and 3.5 members, respectively. LESS procedures were performed at 15?% of institutions. Twenty-two percent of respondents considered NOTES techniques valuable for future urology. Few indications (laparoscopic prostatectomies or nephrectomies) were performed frequently in specialized centers, and the rapidly increasing procedure numbers observed between 2002 and 2007 had dropped to a mild accretion. The results demonstrate broad acceptance of laparoscopy in German urologic surgery, depict the need for structured training facilities, and indicate limited impact of novel techniques (LESS and NOTES). Conclusions The survey demonstrates the 10-year development of urologic laparoscopy and the broad acceptance of laparoscopic techniques.