» Articles » PMID: 29074284

Retroperitoneal Robot-Assisted Versus Open Partial Nephrectomy for CT1 Renal Tumors: A Matched-Pair Comparison of Perioperative and Early Oncological Outcomes

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Specialties Oncology
Urology
Date 2017 Oct 28
PMID 29074284
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to compare perioperative and early oncological outcomes of a matched cohort of patients who underwent retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RP-RAPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for clinically localized renal tumors.

Patients And Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent RP-RAPN and OPN treated at 2 referral centers from January 2011 to December 2015. We focused on the following postoperative outcomes: warm ischemia time (WIT), operative time, blood loss, intra- and postoperative complications, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), hospital stay, and positive surgical margins. Because of inherent differences between patients in terms of baseline and disease characteristics, we relied on a propensity score-matched analysis to adjust for these differences.

Results: Globally, 104 patients were retrospectively evaluated and compared (52 matched individuals). RP-RAPN and OPN groups were comparable in terms of median age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, clinical tumor size, preoperative aspects and dimensions used for anatomic classification and radius, exophyic/endophytic, nearness, anterior/posterior location score. Overall median operative time and WIT were significantly higher in the RP-RAPN group compared with the OPN group (P < .001). Intraoperative (3.8% vs. 0%) and postoperative (21.2% vs. 7.7%) complication rates were higher in the OPN group (P < .001). No statistically significant differences in postoperative eGFR were found. Median length of stay was significantly shorter in the RP-RAPN group (3 vs. 5 days; P < .001). The incidence of positive surgical margins was comparable (3.8%). Trifecta was reached in 82.6% after RP-RAPN and 71.1% after OPN (P = .002).

Conclusion: Retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy offered promising perioperative, early oncological, and functional outcomes, reinforcing the role of robotics as an alternative to open approach for partial nephrectomy.

Citing Articles

Length of hospital stay and procedure time after partial nephrectomy or percutaneous thermal ablation A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kandi M, Richard P, Violette P, Sreekanta A, Hanna S, Couban R Can Urol Assoc J. 2024; 19(3):E104-E113.

PMID: 39418494 PMC: 11879261. DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.8906.


The IRON Study: Investigation of Robot-assisted Versus Open Nephron-sparing Surgery.

Bravi C, Rosiello G, Mazzone E, Minervini A, Mari A, Di Maida F Eur Urol Open Sci. 2023; 49:71-77.

PMID: 36874602 PMC: 9974968. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.12.017.


Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: Can retroperitoneal approach suit for renal tumors of all locations?-A large retrospective cohort study.

Lyu X, Jia Z, Ao L, Ren C, Wu Y, Xu Y BMC Urol. 2022; 22(1):202.

PMID: 36496356 PMC: 9741774. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-022-01128-y.


3D renal model for surgical planning of partial nephrectomy: A way to improve surgical outcomes.

Bianchi L, Cercenelli L, Bortolani B, Piazza P, Droghetti M, Boschi S Front Oncol. 2022; 12:1046505.

PMID: 36338693 PMC: 9634646. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1046505.


Perioperative and long-term functional outcomes of robot-assisted versus open partial nephrectomy: A single-center retrospective study of a Japanese cohort.

Takahara K, Fukaya K, Nukaya T, Takenaka M, Zennami K, Ichino M Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022; 75:103482.

PMID: 35386794 PMC: 8978100. DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103482.