» Articles » PMID: 25111313

Learning Curves for Robot-assisted and Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy

Overview
Journal J Endourol
Publisher Mary Ann Liebert
Date 2014 Aug 12
PMID 25111313
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the learning curve of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) between two surgeons at a single institution.

Methods: A prospectively maintained, Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved kidney surgery database was reviewed retrospectively and the first 116 consecutive LPNs performed by one surgeon (Hyung Kim) and 116 consecutive RPNs performed by a second surgeon (Thomas Schwaab) were identified. The learning curve was evaluated by examining the operative times, warm ischemia times (WITs), estimated blood loss, the postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and intra- and postoperative complications in the quartiles of 29 patients. The LPNs performed by Hyung Kim were done following completion of a minimally invasive fellowship. Thomas Schwaab had minimal experience with LPN and no fellowship training before starting RAPN.

Results: The RAPN and LPN groups had similar patient and tumor characteristics. The RAPN group had a higher preoperative eGFR (74.1±22.04 vs. 80.95±21.25 mL/minutes, p=0.015) and a worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (ECOG 1+ in 12% vs. 2.6%, p<0.001) compared with the LPN group. Rates of intraoperative (p=0.203) and postoperative (p=0.193) complications were similar. In the RAPN group, operating room (OR) time (161±51 vs. 203±55 minutes, p<0.001) and WIT (17.7±14.8 vs. 21.8±9.1 minutes, p<0.001) were shorter. Postoperative stay was longer in the RAPN group (2.4±2.2 vs. 1.67±1.1 days, p<0.001). The percentage decrease in postoperative eGFR was lower in the RAPN group versus the LPN (9.6% vs. 10%). The learning curves differed for log tumor size, log WIT, and postoperative complications.

Conclusions: The variables of the learning curve for RAPN can be obtained earlier than the same variables for LPN. RAPN had a shorter OR time and WITs. The shorter WITs, earlier in the series, led to consistently lower fluctuations in GFR and preservation of the renal function. The learning curves for each procedure need to be re-evaluated at longer intervals to ensure their accuracy.

Citing Articles

Does the transfer of knowledge from the pioneer generation to the second-generation speed-up the learning curve of robot-assisted partial nephrectomies? TRANSFER trial (UroCCR n°83).

Vignot L, Khene Z, Mellouki A, Morrone A, Bernhard J, Bensalah K BJUI Compass. 2025; 6(1):e477.

PMID: 39877566 PMC: 11772077. DOI: 10.1002/bco2.477.


Comparison of Outcomes Between Partial and Radical Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors Larger Than Four Centimeters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Dong B, Song J, Yang W, Zhan H, Luan T, Wang J World J Oncol. 2024; 15(4):625-639.

PMID: 38993256 PMC: 11236382. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1866.


Development and validation of metrics for a new RAPN training model.

Dos Santos Almeida Farinha R, Piro A, Mottaran A, Paciotti M, Puliatti S, Breda A J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):153.

PMID: 38563887 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01911-z.


Transition From Open and Laparoscopic to Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Learning Curve and Outcomes.

Kumar S, Nayak B Cureus. 2024; 16(1):e51646.

PMID: 38313876 PMC: 10838009. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51646.


Analysis of KangDuo-SR-1500 and KangDuo-SR-2000 robotic partial nephrectomy from an operative and ergonomic perspective: a prospective controlled study in porcine models.

Xu L, Li X, Fan S, Li Z, Zuo W, Chen S J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):26.

PMID: 38217779 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01770-0.