Русский
Intraoperative ultrasound navigation in minimally invasive organ-preserving treatment of renal cell carcinoma of a transplanted kidney
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/nephrology.2023.2.26-30
Trushkin R.N., Isaev T.K., Medvedev P.E., Sokolov S.A., Morozov N.V., Parshin V.V., Son A.A., Klementieva T.M.
City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department, Department of Urology, Moscow, Russia
to date, however, there are no data on the use of intraoperative ultrasound for resection of a kidney graft with a tumor in the world. It should be noted that more than 1,500 kidney transplantations are performed annually in the Russian Federation and the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of a transplanted kidney is about 0.5%. Kidney transplant patients have two-fold risk of developing neoplasms compared to the general population, and despite the low incidence in this group, such patients require a non-standard approach from clinicians and represent a difficult clinical case.
Objective. Evaluation of the possibility of using intraoperative ultrasound diagnostics in laparoscopic resection of a kidney graft with a tumor.
Material and methods. 22 patients underwent laparoscopic resection of a transplanted kidney with a tumor at the City Clinical Hospital № 52 from 2016 to 2022. 15 lesions were determined intraparenchymally and were detected only with intraoperative ultrasound.
Results. All patients underwent laparoscopic resection of a transplanted kidney with a tumor using intraoperative ultrasound navigation. There was no bleeding or death.
Conclusion. Intraoperative ultrasound navigation made it possible to identify and visualize intraparenchymal renal graft formations during laparoscopic resection of a transplanted kidney with a tumor. The use of this instrumental diagnostic method in the era of nephron-sparing treatment methods is certainly justified and makes it possible to reduce the volume and duration of the surgery.
About the Autors
Ruslan N. Trushkin – Dr.Sci. (Med.), Head of the Department of Urology, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department.
Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182; e-mail: uro52@mail.ru. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3108-0539.
Teimur K. Isaev – Cand. Sci. (Med.), Urologist at the Department of Urology, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department.
Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182; e-mail: dr.isaev@mail.ru. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3462-8616.
Pavel E. Medvedev – Urologist at the Department of Urology, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department. Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182; e-mail: pah95@mail.ru. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4250-0815.
Sergey A. Sokolov – Urologist at the Department of Urology, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department. Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182; e-mail: sergey.sokolow@mail.ru. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-70162360.
Nikolay V. Morozov – Urologist at the Department of Urology, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department. Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182; e-mail: nikmorozov@rambler.ru.
Vasily V. Parshin – Head of the Radiology Department, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department. Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182; e-mail: vasilii_parshin@mail.ru. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3783-3412.
Aleksey A. Son – Anesthesiologist, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department. Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182;
e-mail: alalson@mail.ru.
Tamara M. Klementyeva – Nephrologist, City Clinical Hospital № 52 of the Moscow Healthcare Department. Address: 3/2 Pekhotnaya st., Moscow, 123182
Similar Articles
