Prediction of pentafecta achievement following laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Implications for robot-assisted surgery candidates

Minimally invasive transperitoneal partial versus radical nephrectomy in obese patients: perioperative and long-term functional outcomes from a large perspective contemporary series (RECORd2 project)

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the perioperative and long-term functional outcomes of laparoscopic (LPN) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in comparison to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) in obese patients diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

Clinical data of 4325 consecutive patients from The Italian REgistry of COnservative and Radical Surgery for cortical renal tumor Disease (RECORD 2 Project) were gathered. Only patients treated with transperitoneal LPN, RAPN, or LRN with Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2, clinical T1 renal tumor and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60 mL/min, were included. Perioperative, and long-term functional outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 388 patients were included, of these 123 (31.7%), 120 (30.9%) and 145 (37.4%) patients were treated with LRN, LPN, and RAPN, respectively. No significant difference was observed in preoperative characteristics. Overall, intra and postoperative complication rates were comparable among the groups. The LRN group had a significantly increased occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) compared to LPN and RAPN (40.6% vs. 15.3% vs. 7.6%, P=0.001). Laparoscopic RN showed a statistically significant higher renal function decline at 60-month follow-up assessment compared to LPN and RAPN. A significant renal function loss was recorded in 30.1% of patients treated with LRN compared to 16.7% and 10.3% of patients treated with LPN and RAPN (P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In obese patients, both LPN and RAPN showcased comparable complication rates and higher renal function preservation than LRN. These findings highlighted the potential benefits of minimally invasive PN over radical surgery in the context of obese individuals.

Search for the optimized and key nephrometry elements combination in retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: A retrospective study

Background

The nephrometry scoring system plays a key role in the preoperative evaluation of partial nephrectomy, and scoring systems based on anatomical characteristics have high similarity in scoring elements. Currently, there is little research on scoring systems related to retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, and there is a lack of research on the combination of scoring elements, which requires further investigation.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical records of 107 patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy conducted by a single operator at a single center. The score and scoring elements were generated based on imaging. The scoring elements of each scoring system and all combinations of two to five elements were extracted. The predictive ability of different score combinations was evaluated by AUC value, and the key parameters of the score were found by taking the intersection. A nomogram was constructed and evaluated.

Results

We observed that with an increase in scoring elements, the strongest combination of elements did not significantly increase the predictive ability of warm ischemia time (P>0.05), postoperative complications (P>0.05), and trifecta achievement (P>0.05). The combination of the maximum tumor diameter and the distance between tumor and collecting system or renal sinus had a good comprehensive predictive ability, and there is no significant difference with the traditional score (P>0.05). The nomogram generated according to this combination has an excellent prediction ability for predicting whether obtain trifecta of partial nephrectomy.

Conclusions

Within the range of two to five elements, the critical degree of elements is more important than the number of elements. The maximum tumor diameter and the distance between the tumor and the collecting system or renal sinus was the key element of the prediction ability.

Comparison of Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Patients With Complete Upper Pole Renal Tumors

OBJECTIVES

We compared the outcomes of transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (TRPN) and retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (RRPN) for complete upper pole renal masses (1 point for the "L" component of the RENAL scoring system).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent either TRPN or RRPN from 2013 to 2016. Baseline demographics and perioperative, functional, and oncological results were compared. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors related to pentafecta achievement (ischemia time ≤25 min, negative margin, perioperative complication free, glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) preservation >90%, and no chronic kidney disease upstaging).

RESULTS

No significant differences between TRPN vs. RRPN were noted for operating time (110 vs. 114 min, p = 0.870), renal artery clamping time (19 vs. 18 min, p = 0.248), rate of positive margins (0.0% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.502), postoperative complication rates (25.0% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.140). TRPN was associated with a more estimated blood loss (50 vs. 40 ml, p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in pathologic variables, rate of eGFR decline for postoperative 12-month (9.0% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.449) functional follow-up. Multivariate analysis identified that only RENAL score (odd ratio: 0.641; 95% confidence interval: 0.455-0.904; p = 0.011) was independently associated with the pentafecta achievement.

CONCLUSIONS

For completely upper pole renal masses, both TRPN and RRPN have good and comparable results. Both surgical approaches remain viable options in the treatment of these cases.

Trifecta achievement in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of predictive factors

PURPOSE

The predictors of trifecta achievement in partial nephrectomy (PN) were poorly inquired and remained a controversial area of discovery. To evaluate predictive factors of trifecta achievement in patients undergoing PN.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant articles. Only studies focusing on postoperative trifecta achievement and exploring its predictor with multivariable analyses were included. The trifecta achievement was defined as negative surgical margins, warm ischemia time <25 minutes, and no complications. Merged odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the predictive effect.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 7066 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were included. The rate of trifecta achievement ranged from 43.3% to 78.6%. Merged results showed that preoperative eGFR (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.02, P=0.02), operative time (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.00, P=0.02), estimated blood loss (OR: 1.00, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.00, P <0.001), tumor size (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.84, P <0.001), medium (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.84, P=0.02) and high PADUA score (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.64, P=0.005) were independently associated with trifecta achievement. A publication bias was identified for tumor size. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of result for tumor size.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger tumor size, medium and high PADUA score are associated with decreased probability of trifecta achievement. After verifying by further high-quality studies, these variables can be incorporated into tools to predict probability of trifecta achievement during clinical practice.