Robotic-assisted laparoscopic tumor enucleation is a feasible technique for renal hilar tumors: A retrospective study

A Novel Classification System of Renal Hilar Tumors for Surgical Guidance: Technique, Outcome, and Safety

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to develop an innovative classification and guidance system for renal hilar tumors and to assess the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for managing such tumors.

METHODS

A total of 179 patients undergoing RAPN for renal hilar tumors were retrospectively reviewed. A novel classification system with surgical techniques was introduced and the perioperative features, tumor characteristics, and the efficacy and safety of RAPN were compared within subgroups.

RESULTS

We classified the tumors according to our novel system as follows: 131 Type I, 35 Type II, and 13 Type III. However, Type III had higher median R.E.N.A.L., PADUA, and ROADS scores compared with the others (all p < 0.001), indicating increased operative complexity and higher estimated blood loss [180.00 (115.00-215.00) ml]. Operative outcomes revealed significant disparities between Type III and the others, with longer operative times [165.00 (145.00-200.50) min], warm ischemia times [24.00 (21.50-30.50) min], tumor resection times [13.00 (12.00-15.50) min], and incision closure times [22.00 (20.00-23.50) min] (all p < 0.005). Postoperative outcomes also showed significant differences, with longer durations of drain removal (77.08 ± 18.16 h) and hospitalization for Type III [5.00 (5.00-6.00) d] (all p < 0.05). Additionally, Type I had a larger tumor diameter than the others (p = 0.009) and pT stage differed significantly between the subtypes (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel renal hilar tumor classification system is capable of differentiating the surgical difficulty of RAPN and further offers personalized surgical steps tailored to each specific classification. It provides a meaningful tool for clinical practice.

Perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for special types of renal tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic): an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes

Purpose

This study aims to perform a pooled analysis to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) between complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic) and non-complex tumors (nonhilar, exophytic, or solid) and evaluate the effects of renal tumor complexity on outcomes in patients undergoing RAPN.

Methods

Four databases were systematically searched, including Science, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, to identify relevant studies published in English up to December 2022. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analyses and calculations. The study was registered with PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42023394792).

Results

In total, 14 comparative trials, including 3758 patients were enrolled. Compared to non-complex tumors, complex tumors were associated with a significantly longer warm ischemia time (WMD 3.67 min, 95% CI 1.78, 5.57; p = 0.0001), more blood loss (WMD 22.84 mL, 95% CI 2.31, 43.37; p = 0.03), and a higher rate of major complications (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.50, 3.67; p = 0.0002). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in operative time, length of stay, transfusion rates, conversion to open nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy rates, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline, intraoperative complication, overall complication, positive surgical margins (PSM), local recurrence, and trifecta achievement.

Conclusions

RAPN can be a safe and effective procedure for complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic) and provides comparable functional and oncologic outcomes to non-complex tumors.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=394792, identifier CRD42023394792.

[Preoperative diagnostics in periampullary adenocarcinomas]

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30-40% of pancreatoduodenectomies for adenocarcinomas result in nonpancreatic periampullary adenocarcinoma as the final diagnosis. Depending on the origin, a distinction is made between four different carcinomas with histomorphological subtypes.

OBJECTIVE

Carcinoma location and subtype are of prognostic and therapeutic relevance; however, the preoperative differentiation is often incorrect despite modern diagnostics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Overview of the current literature on the classification and preoperative diagnostics of periampullary adenocarcinomas.

RESULTS

A precise knowledge of the papillary anatomy is necessary for the correct classification of diagnostic findings. Current studies demonstrate diagnostically valuable information from the anamnesis, imaging and endoscopy.

CONCLUSION

In ca. 70-80% of cases a correct diagnosis of the type of periampullary adenocarcinoma is possible on the basis of interdisciplinary diagnostics. This potentially enables a correspondingly individualized treatment planning in the preoperative phase.

[Multimodal treatment of periampullary carcinoma]

Ampullary carcinoma is a rare malignant neoplasm and arises in the region of Vater's ampulla. The differentiation from pancreatic and distal cholangiocarcinoma can be difficult. The prognosis is more favorable than for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma but recurrences are frequent. An exact diagnostic clarification and differentiation from pancreatic carcinoma is therefore essential. Although the resection of periampullary carcinoma is established, prospectively controlled studies on the role of multimodal treatment are rare. Adjuvant chemotherapy is oriented to the protocols for pancreatic carcinoma and could be of benefit in lymph node metastases, advanced T stage and low differentiation of tumors. Intestinal and pancreatobiliary subtypes can be differentiated histologically, which is relevant for systemic treatment strategies. Patients with pancreatobiliary differentiated tumors in particular could benefit from gemcitabine-based treatment but insufficient evidence exists for chemoradiotherapy. The role of neoadjuvant and perioperative treatment strategies is currently unclear. Molecular characterization can help to identify familial risk constellations and targeted treatment strategies for this rare tumor entity.