Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score-based analysis

Predictive factors of renal function after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in clinical T1b tumors

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) has been shown to be a safe and effective method for treatment of small renal tumors, including clinical T1b renal cell carcinoma (RCC); however, the impact of RAPN for cT1b renal tumors on renal function is not well understood. In this retrospective study, 50 patients who underwent RAPN for cT1b renal tumors were evaluated for pre- and post-operative renal function and perioperative clinical factors. Renal function was assessed using the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at baseline and on postoperative days (POD) 1, 7, 30, and 180.A significant renal functional decline was defined as ≥ 15% reduction in eGFR at POD180 compared with eGFR at baseline. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for renal function decline, including age, sex, RENAL nephrometry score, operative time, and estimated blood loss. The median patient age was 62 years, and the median tumor diameter and RENAL nephrometry score were 44 mm (IQR 43-50) and 8 (IQR 7-9), respectively. Of these patients, 16 (36%) showed a significant renal functional decline at POD 180. In the multivariate analysis, the L component of the RENAL nephrometry score and an estimated blood loss of 200 mL or more were identified as significant risk factors for renal functional decline. These findings suggest that the preoperatively definable L component of the RENAL nephrometry score and intraoperative blood loss, which may be modifiable factors, play significant roles in post-RAPN renal function decline.

Perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic versus open versus robotic partial nephrectomy: Current Review

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment of small renal tumours remain gold-standard for individuals who are suitable candidates. Over the last decade, minimally invasive surgery has provided significant advancements within the field of urological surgery. However, there is still a debate on which surgical modality is superior. This study aims to review the current literature on perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic (LPN), open (OPN) and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) using the standardised system, Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC).

METHODS

A literature search was performed on Cochrane, Embase and PubMed databases. Articles between January 2016 and December 2021 were included. Perioperative outcomes investigated include estimated blood loss (EBL), operating time (OT), conversion rate (CR), warm ischaemia time (WIT), positive surgical margin (PSM) and postoperative complications using CDC. Relevant pieces of literatures were analysed and data were extracted.

RESULTS

This study included 12 studies, with a total of 3908 patients. (LPN = 1120, OPN = 1206 and RPN = 1580). LPN demonstrated a lower overall EBL (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between OT (p = 0.291), CR (p = 0.200), WIT (p = 0.760), PSM (p = 0.549), CDC I (p = 0.556), CDC II (p = 0.779) and CDC⩾III (p = 0.663) of the three surgical approaches.

CONCLUSION

Compared with OPN and RPN, LPN demonstrated a lower EBL. All other perioperative outcomes demonstrated similar results between the three treatment modalities. Future large-scale, prospective, randomised studies is necessary to draw a definitive conclusion from this analysis.

Reconstruction Techniques After Partial Nephrectomy: Classic vs. Sutureless Approach-A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to update the information about the different types of reconstruction after partial nephrectomy, with special emphasis on the new methods of suture-free hemostasis currently available.

RECENT FINDINGS

The aim of renal reconstruction is to avoid bleeding and leakage of the collecting system, but now the renorrhaphy technique used is considered one of the modifiable determinants of renal function after surgery. In an attempt to avoid the loss of renal function implicit in classic reconstruction, new techniques have been described to control hemostasis and urinary leakage, which employ fewer suture layers, different suture materials and designs, and a wide range of commercially available hemostatic materials. Multiple suture characteristics have been studied as a potential factor influencing the renal function observed after partial nephrectomy. Single-plane suture techniques, the use of bearded sutures, and running sutures seem to be associated with less deterioration in postoperative renal function, and deep medullary sutures should be avoided to avoid affecting the arcuate arteries. Sutureless hemostasis systems could prevent the deterioration of renal function and complications derived from suturing, also reducing ischemia time and surgical time without increasing the risk of complications.

Comparing the outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the advantages and disadvantages of open (OPN), laparoscopic (LPN), and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) with particular attention to intraoperative, immediate postoperative, as well as longer-term functional and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-NMA guidelines. Binary data were compared using odds ratios (ORs). Mean differences (MDs) were used for continuous variables. ORs and MDs were extracted from the articles to compare the efficacy of the various surgical approaches. Statistical validity is guaranteed when the 95% credible interval does not include 1.

RESULTS

In total, there were 31 studies included in the NMA with a combined 7869 patients. Of these, 33.7% (2651/7869) underwent OPN, 20.8% (1636/7869) LPN, and 45.5% (3582/7689) RAPN. There was no difference for either LPN or RAPN as compared to OPN in ischaemia time, intraoperative complications, positive surgical margins, operative time or trifecta rate. The estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative complications and length of stay were all significantly reduced in RAPN when compared with OPN. The outcomes of RAPN and LPN were largely similar except the significantly reduced EBL in RAPN.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and NMA suggests that RAPN is the preferable operative approach for patients undergoing surgery for lower-staged RCC.

Perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robotic vs. laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors (RENAL score ≥7): an evidence-based analysis

Objective

To evaluate the current literature comparing outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) treating complex renal tumors (RENAL nephrometry score ≥7).

Methods

We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Scopus databases up to March 2023. Review Manager 5.4 performed a pooled analysis of the data for random effects. Besides, sensitivity and subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and GRADE to evaluate study quality and level of evidence.

Results

Eight observational studies comprising 1346 patients (RPN: 695; LPN: 651) were included in this study. Compared to LPN, RPN had a shorter operative time (OT) (weight mean difference [WMD]: -14.73 min; p = 0.0003), shorter warm ischemia time (WIT) (WMD: -3.47 min; p = 0.002), lower transfusion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.66; p = 0.04), shorter length of stay (LOS) (WMD: -0.65 days; p < 0.00001), lower postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) change (WMD = -2.33 mL/min/1.73 m2; p = 0.002) and lower intraoperative complications (OR: 0.52; p = 0.04). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.84), conversion to radical nephrectomy (p = 0.12), postoperative complications (p = 0.11), major complications (defined Clavien-Dindo grade 3 (p = 0.43), overall complications (p = 0.15), postoperative eGFR (p = 0.28), local recurrence (p = 0.35), positive surgical margin (PSM) (p = 0.63), overall survival (OS) (p = 0.47), cancer-specific survival (CSS) (p = 0.22) and 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) (p = 0.53).

Conclusion

Patients with complex renal tumors (RENAL score ≥7), RPN is superior to LPN in decreasing the OT, WIT, LOS, transfusion rate, change in eGFR and the incidence of intraoperative complications while maintaining oncological control and avoiding a decline in renal function. However, our findings need further validation in a large-sample prospective randomized study.

A novel multiplex score to predict outcomes of partial nephrectomy for multiple tumors

BACKGROUND

The RENAL nephrometry score (RNS) is widely used to describe renal mass complexity and inform patient counseling for partial nephrectomy (PN). However, in cases with multiple tumors, it is unknown which features drive perioperative outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To employ a novel scoring equation (multiplex score [MS]) derived from RNS to assess outcomes of multiplex PN at our institution.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 62 consecutive multiplex PN (median (range) # tumors = 4(2-11), 65% robotic) were performed by a single surgeon. The MS was defined a priori as a weighted score derived from RNS (# low risk ([LR] lesions) + 2*(# intermediate risk [IR]) + 4*(# high risk [HR]) based on published complication rates.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

MS was dichotomized into favorable/unfavorable based on median score. Patient outcomes were maintained prospectively. MS was compared with other potential RNS derived scoring systems.

RESULTS AND LIMITATION

A total of 249 tumors were scored. Median (range) MS was 6(range 2-20, IQR 3-8). Complications occurred in 10 patients (16.1%). Only 1 complication occurred in the favorable MS(<6) group, and MS was associated with perioperative complication (P = 0.02) and blood loss (P < .001). When compared to other potential scoring systems, MS had the best area under the curve (AUC) to predict operative complications (0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel MS was associated with complications and blood loss. This tool may facilitate standardized reporting of complexity for multiplex series, with special relevance for hereditary cancer syndromes.

PATIENT SUMMARY

For patients who have one kidney tumor, there are established scoring systems to help patients and surgeons decide on the surgical plan. However currently, for patients with more than one renal tumor, there is no such scoring system. Here, we present the "Multiplex Score" to aid shared-decision-making in cases with more than one renal tumor.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic vs. laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A meta-analysis

Introduction

To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) vs. laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for complex renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register for studies from 2000 to 2020 to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of RPN and LPN in patients with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7. We used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data.

Results

Seven studies were acquired in our study. No significant differences were found in the estimated blood loss (WMD: 34.49; 95% CI: −75.16–144.14; p = 0.54), hospital stay (WMD: −0.59; 95% CI: −1.24–0.06; p = 0.07), positive surgical margin (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.65–1.11; p = 0.23), major postoperative complications (OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.52–1.54; p = 0.69) and transfusion (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.48–1.08; p = 0.11) between the groups. RPN showed better outcomes in the operating time (WMD: −22.45; 95% CI: −35.06 to −9.85; p = 0.0005), postoperative renal function (WMD: 3.32; 95% CI: 0.73–5.91; p = 0.01), warm ischemia time (WMD: −6.96; 95% CI: −7.30–−6.62; p &lt; 0.0001), conversion rate to radical nephrectomy (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.66; p = 0.002) and intraoperative complications (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.28–0.97; p = 0.04).

Discussion

RPN is a safe and effective alternative to LPNs for or the treatment of complex renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7 with a shorter warm ischemic time and better postoperative renal function.

Laparoscopic vs. open procedure for intermediate‑ and high‑risk endometrial cancer: a minimum 4-year follow-up analysis

BACKGROUND

The long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic and open procedures for patients with intermediate‑ and high‑risk endometrial cancer (EC) remain unclear. Accordingly, laparoscopy cannot still be recommended as the standard choice for intermediate‑ and high‑risk EC. This retrospective study aimed to assess the perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy and open surgery in patients with intermediate- and high‑risk ECs within a minimum 4-year follow-up.

METHODS

We included 201 patients who underwent laparoscopic or open procedures for intermediate‑ and high‑risk EC between 2010 and 2017. Between-procedure comparisons of perioperative and oncological outcomes were performed using the independent t-test or Pearson's chi-squared test and the Kaplan-Meier method, respectively.

RESULTS

Finally, there were 136 intermediate‑ and 65 high‑risk endometrial tumors in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively. There were no between-group differences in all baseline characteristics. Compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group had a significantly longer mean operating time (p = 0.005) and a lower mean estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.031). There was a higher possibility of postoperative complication in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.048). There were no significant between-group differences in pathological outcomes as well as the recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates (p = 0.626 and p = 0.148, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with intermediate‑ and high‑risk EC, laparoscopic surgery has an advantage over the open surgery in reducing EBL and the rate of postoperative complications without weakening the oncological control. There were no between-procedure differences in the recurrence-free and overall survival rates.

Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy Mid-Term Oncologic Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Background: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is used more and more in present days as a therapy option for surgical treatment of cT1 renal masses. Current guidelines equally recommend open (OPN), laparoscopic (LPN), or robotic partial nephrectomy (PN). The aim of this review was to analyze the most representative RAPN series in terms of reported oncological outcomes. (2) Methods: A systematic search of Webofscience, PUBMED, Clinicaltrials.gov was performed on 1 August 2022. Studies were considered eligible if they: included patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) stage T1, were prospective, used randomized clinical trials (RCT) or retrospective studies, had patients undergo RAPN with a minimum follow-up of 48 months. (3) Results: Reported positive surgical margin rates were from 0 to 10.5%. Local recurrence occurred in up to 3.6% of patients. Distant metastases were reported in up to 6.4% of patients. 5-year cancer free survival (CFS) estimates rates ranged from 86.4% to 98.4%. 5-year cancer specific survival (CSS) estimates rates ranged from 90.1% to 100%, and 5-year overall survival (OS) estimates rated ranged from 82.6% to 97.9%. (4) Conclusions: Data coming from retrospective and prospective series shows very good oncologic outcomes after RAPN. Up to now, 10-year survival outcomes were not reported. Taken together, RAPN deliver similar oncologic performance to OPN and LPN.

Differential efficacy of ablation therapy versus partial nephrectomy between clinical T1a and T1b renal tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the differential clinical outcomes of patients treated with partial nephrectomy (PN) vs. those treated with ablation therapy (AT) such as radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation and microwave ablation for cT1b compared to cT1a renal tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for articles published before August 2021. Studies were deemed eligible if they compared clinical outcomes in patients who underwent PN with those who underwent AT for cT1a and/or cT1b renal tumors.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 studies comprising 13,996 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. In both cT1a and cT1b renal tumors, there was no significant difference in the percent decline of estimated glomerular filtration rates or in the overall/severe complication rates between PN and AT. Compared to AT, PN was associated with a lower risk of local recurrence in both patients with cT1a and cT1b tumors (cT1a: pooled risk ratio [RR]; 0.43, 95% confidence intervals [CI]; 0.28-0.66, cT1b: pooled RR; 0.41, 95%CI; 0.23-0.75). Subgroup analyses regarding the technical approach revealed no statistical difference in local recurrence rates between percutaneous AT and PN in patients with cT1a tumors (pooled RR; 0.61, 95%CI; 0.32-1.15). In cT1b, however, PN was associated with a lower risk of local recurrence (pooled RR; 0.45, 95%CI; 0.23-0.88). There was no difference in distant metastasis or cancer mortality rates between PN and AT in patients with cT1a, or cT1b tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

AT has a substantially relevant disadvantage with regards to local recurrence compared to PN, particularly in cT1b renal tumors. Despite the limitations inherent to the nature of retrospective and unmatched primary cohorts, percutaneous AT could be used as a reasonable alternative treatment for well-selected patients with cT1a renal tumors.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for moderate to highly complex renal masses. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Multiple studies have been published recently assessing feasibility of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for moderate to highly complex renal masses. Some studies have even compared partial nephrectomy (PN) performed through various modalities such as open PN (OPN) versus RAPN and laparoscopic PN (LPN) versus OPN. The primary aim of this review was to analyze perioperative outcomes such as warm ischemia time (WIT), duration of surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, blood transfusion, length of stay, and margin status following RAPN for complex renal masses. Another objective was to compare perioperative outcomes following various surgical modalities, i.e., OPN, LPN, or RAPN.

Methods

Literature search was conducted to identify studies reporting perioperative outcomes following RAPN for moderate (Radius, Endophytic/Exophytic, Nearness, Anterior/posterior location [RENAL] score 7-9 or Preoperative Aspects of Dimension used for anatomic classification [PADUA] score 8-9) to high complexity renal masses (RENAL or PADUA score ≥ 10). Meta-analysis of robotic versus OPN and robotic versus LPN was also performed. Study protocol was registered with PROPSERO (CRD42019121259).

Results

In this review, 22 studies including 2,659 patients were included. Mean duration of surgery, WIT, and EBL was 132.5-250.8 min, 15.5-30 min, and 100-321 ml, respectively. From pooled analysis, positive surgical margin, need for blood transfusion, minor and major complications were seen in 3.9%, 5.2%, 19.3%, and 6.3% of the patients. No significant difference was noted between RAPN and LPN for any of the perioperative outcomes. Compared to OPN, RAPN had significantly lower EBL, complications rate, and need for transfusion.

Conclusions

RAPN for moderate to high complexity renal masses is associated with acceptable perioperative outcomes. LPN and RAPN were equal in terms of perioperative outcomes for complex masses whereas, OPN had significantly higher blood loss, complications rate, and need for transfusion as compared to RAPN.

Factors influencing warm ischemia time in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy change depending on the surgeon's experience

INTRODUCTION

Warm ischemia time (WIT) is a primary concern for robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN) patients because longer WIT is significantly associated with postoperative deteriorating kidney function. Tumor complexity, determined by the RENAL nephrometry score (RENAL score), can help predict surgical outcomes, but it is unclear what RENAL score and clinical factors affect WIT. This study explored the clinical factors predicting long WIT in experienced surgeon to RALPN.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our institute, 174 RALPNs were performed between November 2013 and February 2021, of which 114 were performed by a single surgeon and included in this study. Clinical staging and the total RENAL score were determined based on preoperative CT scans. The cases were divided into three groups based on experience: period 1: 1-38, period 2: 39-76, and period 3: 77-114. The clinical factors associated with longer WIT were analyzed per period.

RESULTS

The overall median tumor diameter was 32 mm, and one patient had a positive surgical margin, but there were no cancer-related deaths. In total, there were 18 complications (15.8%). Periods 2 and 3 had larger tumor diameters (p < 0.01) and worse preoperative kidney function (p = 0.029) than period 1. A RENAL L-component score of 3 was associated with longer WIT in period 3 (odds ratio: 3.900; 95% confidence interval: 1.004-15.276; p = 0.044), but the tumor diameter and the total RENAL score were not.

CONCLUSIONS

A large tumor in the central lesion indicated by the RENAL L-component score was associated with increased WIT in RALPN.

Comparison of outcomes between laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors: RENAL score ≥7 or maximum tumor size >4 cm

INTRODUCTION

We reviewed current studies and performed a meta-analysis to compare outcomes between laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) treating complex renal tumors (RENAL score ≥7 or maximum clinical tumor size >4 cm).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Using the databases of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, a comprehensive literature search was performed in April, 2020. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effect model. Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Ten observational studies including 5193 patients (LPN: 1574; RAPN: 3619) were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding conversion to open (P=0.07) surgery, all complications (P=0.12), grade 1-2 complications (P=0.10), grade 3-5 complications (P=0.93), operative time (P=0.94), estimated blood loss (P=0.17). Patients undergoing LPN had a significant higher rate of conversion to radical (OR=4.33; 95% CI: 2.01-9.33; P<0.001), a longer ischemia time (IT, P<0.001; WMD=3.02 min; 95% CI: 1.67 to 4.36), a longer length of stay (LOS, P<0.001; WMD=0.67 days; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.99), a lower rate of positive surgical margin (P=0.03; OR=0.71; 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.96), a greater eGFR decline (P<0.001; WMD=2.41 mL/min/1.73 m²; 95% CI: 1.22 to 3.60), a higher rate of CKD upstaging (P<0.001; OR=2.44; 95% CI: 1.54 to 3.87). No obvious publication bias was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

For complex renal tumors, RAPN is more favorable than LPN in terms of lower rate of conversion to radical surgery, shorter IT, shorter LOS, less eGFR decline, and lower rate of CKD upstaging. Methodological limitations of observational studies should be taken into account in interpreting these results.

The clinical application value of mixed-reality-assisted surgical navigation for laparoscopic nephrectomy

Purpose

Laparoscopic nephrectomy (LN) has become the preferred method for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Adequate preoperative assessment or intraoperative navigation is key to the successful implementation of LN. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical application value of mixed‐reality–assisted surgical navigation (MRASN) in LN.

Patients and Methods

A total of 100 patients with stage T1N0M0 renal tumors who underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) or laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) were prospectively enrolled and divided into a mixed‐reality‐assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (MRALN) group (n = 50) and a non–mixed‐reality‐assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (non‐MRALN) group (n = 50). All patients underwent renal contrast‐enhanced CT scans. The CT DICOM data of all patients in the MRALN group were imported into the mixed‐reality (MR) postprocessing workstation and underwent holographic three‐dimensional visualization (V3D) modeling and MR displayed, respectively. We adopted the Likert scale to evaluate the clinical application value of MRASN. The consistency of evaluators was assessed using the Cohen kappa coefficient (k).

Results

No significant differences in patient demographic indicators between the MRALN group and the non‐MRALN group (P > .05). The subjective score of MRASN clinical application value in operative plan formulation, intraoperative navigation, remote consultation, teaching guidance, and doctor‐patient communication were higher in the MRASN group than in the non‐MRASN group (all P < .001). There were significantly more patients for whom LPN was successfully implemented in the MRALN group than in the non‐MRALN group (82% vs 46%, P < .001). The MRALN group had a shorter operative time (OT) and warm ischemia time (WIT) and less estimated blood loss (EBL) than the non‐MRALN group (all P < .001).

Conclusion

MRASN is helpful for operative plan formulation, intraoperative navigation, remote consultation, teaching guidance, and doctor‐patient communication. MRALN may effectively improve the successful implementation rate of LPN and reduce the OT, WIT, and EBL.

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score-based analysis

Objectives

To present the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with RENAL nephrometry scores ≥7.

Patients and methods

One hundred and seventy patients, during the study period, were retrospectively reviewed in our analysis according to inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) method was applied to impose restrictions on the potential baseline confounders. The comparisons of perioperative and functional outcomes between the RPN and LPN groups were conducted and analyzed after PSM, Kaplan‐Meier analyses were performed to assess the differences about oncological outcomes between the two groups before and after PSM.

Results

One hundred and nine and 61 T1b renal tumors with RENAL scores ≥7 were identified in the LPN and RPN groups, respectively. All significant differences in baseline characteristics disappeared after PSM. Except for 3 patients missing an appropriate pair, all the patients in the RPN group were successfully matched to 58 patients in the LPN group in a 1:1 ratio. Within the matched cohort, the RPN group was related to a significantly shorter mean operating time (OT) (P = .040), shorter mean warm ischemia time (WIT) (P = .023), and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (P = .023). The possibilities of surgical conversion, postoperative complication, and positive surgical margin were similar in the LPN and RPN groups. And there was also no significant difference in the pathological, renal functional, and oncological outcomes between the two series.

Conclusions

For patients with anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7, RPN had an advantage over LPN in reducing OT, WIT, and postoperative hospital stay length without increasing the risk of complications and weakening the oncological control, while the two surgical methods were similar in renal functional preservation.