Search

Psoas abscess is a rare pathological entity being retroperitonescopy an unusual therapeutic modality for its resolution.The objective is to present and describe five patients with a diagnosis of psoas abscess that were resolved by retroperitoneoscopy in our institution and then carried out a non-systematic review of the literature.The mean age was 58.8 years and 80% were male. All patients had back pain and none had therapeutic resolution with conservative treatment. 60% of the patients had a methicillin sensitive Staphyylococus Aureus. In the follow-up with a mean of 10.2 months, no recurrence was observed.Early diagnosis of psoas abscess is important for its correct resolution. In our small series of patients, retroperitoneoscopy was an effective treatment.

To analyze the trifecta results in patients with T1a and T1b renal tumors treated with retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy (RPN).A cross-sectional prospective observational study was conducted on 106 patients with cT1 renal tumor submitted to RPN. Trifecta was reported as no ≥ 2 Clavien-Dindo complications, warm ischemia time (WIT) ≤ 25 minutes, ≤ 15% postoperative ΔGFR, and nonpositive margins.The mean age was 58 years (SD ± 12). The median (Q1; Q3) tumor size was 3.5 (2.2; 4.5) cm. Of the treated patients, 33% had a ventral tumor. R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score was low complexity in 54% of cases and high complexity in 4%. WIT median (Q1; Q3) was 20 (14; 23) minutes. Estimated blood loss median (Q1; Q3) was 50 (0; 100) ml. There were no conversions to open surgery. ΔGFR was15% in 17.5% of patients. There were no postoperative complications in 84% of cases. Nonpositive margins were observed. Sixty-eight percent were pT1a and 32% were pT1b. Seventy-two percent of patients presented trifecta. A statistically significant difference was found between trifecta and tumor size (3 cm vs. 4.4 cm; p0.001), complexity (low complexity 90% vs. intermediate complexity 56%; p0.0001), and pT (T1a 81% vs. T1b 53%; p0.003).RPN is a safe and effective treatment modality for T1a and T1b renal tumors. Trifecta rate was 72%. Tumor size, tumor complexity, and pT were found to be an associated factor for trifecta.

Background: Since its first description, laparoscopic adrenalectomy has become the gold standard for the surgical treatment of adrenal tumors. In patients who have previously undergone major transperitoneal or retroperitoneal surgeries, a retroperitoneal access through a virgin thoracic cavity might be the only alternative for a minimally invasive approach. Case Presentation: We report a case of a 61-year-old man with a history of retroperitoneal nephrectomy caused by renal cell carcinoma. He then developed a cancer recurrence in the left renal fossa, which was rescued with a transperitoneal laparotomy. During surveillance, a CT scan revealed two lung nodules and an adrenal tumor, a biopsy of which confirmed as relapsed kidney cancer. The patient had a good performance status so pazopanib (800 mg/day) was initiated, with a partial response in the adrenal tumor. Considering the patient's background, he was regarded as an appropriate candidate for a thoracoscopic transdiaphragmatic adrenalectomy. The patient was operated under general anesthesia, with selected double-lumen endotracheal intubation in lateral decubitus position. Once transthoracic ports were placed, the diaphragm was incised, exposing the retroperitoneal space. At this stage, the adrenal mass was identifiable and dissected free from surrounding structures. There were no intraoperative and postoperative complications. The patient was discharged after surgery without opioid requirement. The pathology report confirmed the relapsed renal cancer with negative surgical margins. The patient was alive and without a kidney cancer relapse at his last follow-up visit. Conclusions: As we described in our case, thoracoscopic transdiaphragmatic adrenalectomy might be taken into consideration in patients with a history of previous major transabdominal or retroperitoneal surgeries. In addition, the lateral decubitus position might be advantageous for anesthetists unfamiliar with the prone position.

The improvements in laparoscopic urological surgery have made laparoscopic adenomectomy (LA) possible in voluminous prostatic adenomas.The objective of this study was to assess the results of the LA and compared them with results of the open adenomectomy (OA).A comparative study of 41 patients undergoing LA [23 LA with Millin technique (LA-MT) and 21 with transvesical technique (LA-TV)] was conducted with 44 patients undergoing OL in prostate adenomas100 grams. Data were recorded prospectively, at three different institutions. Preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative and complications results were evaluated.Prostate volume was 165 (100-345) gr for LA versus 170 (100-328) gr for OA (p=0.669). Preoperative IPSS was 3 (0-3) and Q max. 7 (0-15) for LA against 2 (0-3) and 7 (0-15.3) for OA (p=0.296;p=0.316). There was no difference in surgical time (p=0.069) between both techniques. LA had less operative bleeding, 100 (10-1000) ml than OA, 500 (100-1000) ml (p=0.0001) and a shorter hospital stay, 3 (1-8) days against 3.5 (3-10) days (p=0.0001), postoperative IPSS was 1 (1-2) and Q max. 25 (17-45) for LA against 1 (1-3) and 25.5 (12-44) for OA (p=0889;p=836). There were no differences neither in transfusions requirements' nor complications.LA presented similar short-term functional results with less operative bleeding and shorter hospitalization time than OA with similar prostate volumes resected.INTRODUCCIÓN: Los avances en la cirugía laparoscópica urológica han permitido la realización de la adenomectomía simple laparoscópica (ASL) en adenomas prostáticos voluminosos.El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar los resultados de la ASL y compararlos con la adenomectomía simple abierta (ASA).Se realizó un estudio comparativo de 41 pacientes sometidos a ASL [23 ASL con técnica de Millin (ASL-TM) y 21 con técnica transvesical (ASL-TV)] con 44 pacientes sometidos a ASA en adenomasde próstata100 gramos. Los datos se registraron de modo prospectivo, en tres centros diferentes. Se evaluaron los resultados preoperatorios, operatorios, postoperatorios y complicaciones según escala de Clavien.El volumen prostático fue 165 (100-345) gr para ASL contra 170 (100-328) gr para ASA (p=0,669). IPSS preoperatorio 3 (0-3) y Q máx. 7 (0-15) para ASL contra 2 (0-3) y 7 (0-15,3) para ASA (p=0,296; p=0,316). No hubo diferencia tiempo quirúrgico (p=0,069). ASL tuvo menos sangrado operatorio100 (10-1000) ml que la ASA 500 (100-1000) ml (p=0,0001) y una menor estadía hospitalaria 3 (1-8) días contra 3,5 (3-10) días (p=0,0001), IPSS postoperatorio1 (1-2) y Q máx. 25 (17-45) para ASL contra 1(1-3) y 25,5 (12-44) para ASA (p=0889; p=836). No hubo diferencias en el requerimiento de transfusiones ni complicaciones.CONCLUSIÓN: La ASL presentó similares resultados funcionales a corto plazo con un menor sangrado operatorio y tiempo de hospitalización que la ASA y una baja tasa de complicaciones a similares volúmenes prostáticos resecados.