Der Urologe

, Volume 51, Issue 5, pp 669–670 | Cite as

Kommentar zur Nephrektomie – laparoskopisch vs. robotisch

Leitthema
  • 51 Downloads

Comments on nephrectomy – laparoscopic versus robotic

Notes

Interessenkonflikt

Keine Angaben

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ et al (1991) Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 146:278–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaynan AM, Lee KL, Winfield HN (2002) Survey of urological laparoscopic practices in the state of California. J Urol 167:2380–2386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Miller DC, Hollingsworth JM, Hafez KS et al (2006) Partial nephrectomy for small renal masses: an emerging quality of care concern? J Urol 175:853–858PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hemal AK, Kumar A, Kumar R et al (2007) Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a long-term prospective comparison. J Urol 177:862–866PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L et al (2000) Remote laparoscopic radical prostatectomy carried out with a robot. Report of a case. Prog Urol 10:520–523PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klingler DW, Hemstreet GP, Balaji KC (2005) Feasibility of robotic radical nephrectomy – initial results of single-institution pilot study. Urology 65:1086–1089PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Petros FG, Rogers CG (2010) Computer-assisted robotic renal surgery. Ther Adv Urol 2(3):127–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gill SI, Eisenberg MS, Aron M et al (2011) „Zero Ischemia“ partial nephrectomy: novel laparoscopic and robotic technique. Eur Urol 59:128–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Zentrum Operative MedizinUniversitätsklinikum WürzburgWürzburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations