Assessing the Trade-off Between the Safety and Effectiveness of Off-clamp Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Masses with a High RENAL Score: A Propensity Score-matched Comparison of Perioperative and Functional Outcomes in a Multicenter Analysis

BACKGROUND

Tumors with a high nephrometry score represent a challenging surgical scenario for which robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is a primary option in expert hands.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative and functional outcomes of off-clamp and on-clamp RPN in patients with renal masses with a high RENAL score (≥9).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

For this retrospective analysis, an RPN data set including 1604 patients treated at three institutions between 2003 and 2021 was queried for cases with a RENAL score ≥9.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We used 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) to select a cohort in which imbalances between the off-clamp and on-clamp groups were minimized. We used χ2 and Student t tests to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the probability of having an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥45 ml/min during follow-up. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of a trifecta outcome (negative surgical margin status, no Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications, eGFR decline ≤30%) and of retaining eGFR ≥45 ml/min over time.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

From an overall cohort of 354 patients (142 on-clamp, 212 off-clamp), a homogeneous PSM cohort of 78 patients in each group was selected (p ≥ 0.17). In the PSM cohort, operative time was significantly shorter in the off-clamp group (p < 0.001). There were no differences between the groups in the rates of severe complications (p = 0.32) and positive surgical margins (p = 0.24). The rate of trifecta achievement was significantly higher in the off-clamp group (83.3% vs 67.9%; p = 0.03). Warm ischemia time >20 min was independently negatively associated with trifecta achievement (odds ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.74). Moreover, the off-clamp group had a significantly higher probability of retaining eGFR ≥45 ml/min over time (3 yr: 95.9% vs 81.6%; p = 0.03); every 1-min increase in warm ischemia time reduced this probability by 1.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a favorable trade-off between the benefits and risks of off-clamp RPN, with similar perioperative outcomes and a net benefit in terms of trifecta achievement and long-term renal function outcomes in comparison to on-clamp RPN.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The complexity of surgery for kidney tumors can be assessed using the RENAL score, which is a measure of the location and size of a kidney tumor. In a multicenter series of patients with tumors with a high RENAL score, we compared outcomes between strategies with (on-clamp) and without (off-clamp) clamping of kidney blood vessels during robot-assisted removal of part of the affected kidney. We found that off-clamp surgery results in better postoperative kidney function.

A systematic review of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy outcomes for advanced indications: Large tumors (cT2-T3), solitary kidney, completely endophytic, hilar, recurrent, and multiple renal tumors

Objective

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) has become widely used for treatment of renal cell carcinoma and it is expanding in the field of complex renal masses. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze outcomes of RAPN for completely endophytic renal masses, large tumors (cT2-T3), renal cell carcinoma in solitary kidney, recurrent tumors, completely endophytic and hilar masses, and simultaneous and multiple tumors.

Methods

A comprehensive search in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed in December 2022 for English language papers. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the role of RAPN in the setting of each category of complex renal masses considered. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes.

Results

After screening 1250 records, 43 full-text manuscripts were selected, comprising over 8500 patients. Twelve and thirteen studies reported data for endophytic and hilar renal masses, respectively. Five and three studies reported outcomes for cT2-T3 and solitary kidney patients, respectively. Four studies focused on redo-RAPN for recurrent tumors. Two studies investigated simultaneous bilateral renal masses and five reports focused on multiple tumor excision in ipsilateral kidney.

Conclusion

Over the past decade, evidence supporting the use of RAPN for the most challenging nephron-sparing surgery indications has continuously grown. Although limitations remain including study design and lack of detailed long-term functional and oncological outcomes, the adoption of RAPN for the included advanced indications is associated with favorable surgical outcomes with good preservation of renal function without compromising the oncological result. Certainly, a higher likelihood of complication might be expected when facing extremely challenging cases. However, none of these indications should be considered per se an exclusion criterion for performing RAPN. Ultimately, a risk-adapted approach should be employed.

Expanding the limits of nephron-sparing surgery: Surgical technique and mid-term outcomes of purely off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy for totally endophytic renal tumors

OBJECTIVES

To report surgical technique, perioperative, oncological, and mid-term functional outcomes in a single-center purely off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy series for totally endophytic masses.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected, institutional review board-approved renal cancer database was carried out to include patients with a totally endophytic renal tumor treated with off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy between January 2013 and December 2020 at our center. Our database was queried to identify cases that had been assigned 3 points for the "E" domain of the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score and 3 points for the "exophytic rate" domain of the PADUA (Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical) nephrometry score. Preoperative indocyanine green renal mass marking was performed in 33 patients, in whom the tumor was vascularized by a specific feeding artery. Surgical steps, perioperative, oncological and functional data were reported.

RESULTS

Fifty-six consecutive patients with totally endophytic renal masses were treated. The median tumor diameter was 3 cm, and median PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. scores were both 10. The median operative time was 82 min. Low-grade Clavien complications occurred in two patients (3.6%) and high-grade Clavien complications were observed in four patients (7.1%). Positive surgical margins were detected in one patient; 2-year recurrence-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival rates were 100%, 100%, and 98.2%, respectively. At a median follow-up of 24 months, new onset of chronic kidney disease stage 3b occurred in one patient. At last follow-up, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 77 mL/min, with a median estimated glomerular filtration rate percent decrease of 5.5%. Trifecta was achieved in 91% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Purely off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy is a feasible and safe surgical approach, even in totally endophytic renal tumors, providing a favorable perioperative complications rate, excellent oncological outcomes, and negligible impact on renal function at mid-term follow-up. Indocyanine green preoperative marking of endophytic renal tumors represents a useful tool for rapid intraoperative identification of the mass, real-time control of resection margins, and a more precise dissection.

Combined Robotic Surgery for Double Renal Masses and Prostate Cancer: Myth or Reality?

With the widespread use of imaging modalities performed for the staging of prostate cancer, the incidental detection of synchronous tumors is increasing in frequency. Robotic surgery represents a technical evolution in the treatment of solid tumors of the urinary tract, and it can be a valid option in the case of multi-organ involvement. We reported a case of synchronous prostate cancer and bifocal renal carcinoma in a 66-year-old male. We performed the first case of a combined upper- and lower-tract robotic surgery for a double-left-partial nephrectomy associated with radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal approach. A comprehensive literature review in this field has also been carried out. Total operative time was 265 min. Renal hypotension time was 25 min. Blood loss was 250 mL. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course. No recurrence occurred after 12 months. In the literature, 10 cases of robotic, radical, or partial nephrectomy and simultaneous radical prostatectomy have been described. Robotic surgery provides less invasiveness than open surgery with comparable oncological efficacy, overcoming the limitations of the traditional laparoscopy. During robotic combined surgery for synchronous tumors, the planning of the trocars' positioning is crucial to obtain good surgical results, reducing the abdominal trauma, the convalescence, and the length of hospitalization with a consequent cost reduction. Rare complications can be related to prolonged pneumoperitoneum. Simultaneous robotic prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy appears to be a safe and feasible surgical option in patients with synchronous prostate cancer and renal cell carcinoma.

Trifecta Outcomes in Renal Hilar Tumors: A Comparison Between Robotic and Open Partial Nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To report a comparative analysis of outcomes in patients who underwent excisions of renal hilar tumors using both open and robotic approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed robotic and open patients who underwent partial nephrectomy of renal hilar tumors between 2011 and 2016. "Trifecta" was defined as negative surgical margins, no complications, and a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) preservation of ≥90% at last follow-up. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to equilibrate treatment groups, minimize selection bias, and optimize inference on the basis of each patient's clinicodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred robotic and 64 open patients had sufficient data for IPTW. After weighting, there were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups (p < 0.05). On adjusted analyses, robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) achieved equivalent rates of trifecta to open surgery (21.1% vs 13.9%, respectively, p = 0.387). There were no differences between robotic and open cohorts for negative margin rates (72.8% vs 90.4%, p = 0.124), absence of complications (68.6% vs 75.2%, p = 0.587), or GFR ≥90% (39.4% vs 21.6%, p = 0.111). The robotic cohort had a shorter mean length of stay (3.8 vs 5.0 days, p = 0.012), and no difference in estimated blood loss (253.3 vs 357.1, p = 0.091) or operating time (199.8 vs 200.4, p = 0.961).

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis both open and RPN for hilar tumors were equally likely to achieve a low "trifecta" outcome with a shorter mean length of stay in the robotic cohort.

Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy with sequential clamping of segmental renal arteries for multiple ipsilateral renal tumors: initial outcomes

Background

To assess the technical feasibility and outcomes of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) with sequential segmental renal artery (SRA) clamping for multiple ipsilateral renal tumors (MIRTs).

Methods

From April 2016 to February 2018, consecutive eleven cases successfully underwent RPN with sequential SRA clamping under the guidance of dual-source computed tomography (DSCT).

Results

Ten cases had two lesions and two cases had three at the ipsilateral kidneys. The mean size and the mean R.E.N.A.L score for the dominant lesion of single case were 3.3 cm and 5.7, respectively. Twenty-two lesions (84.6%) had one target SRA and four (15.4%) had two target SRAs. Satisfactory ischemic areas were achieved by sequentially clamping two (81.8%) or three (18.2%) target SRAs with mean clamping time of 18.8 (15.0–27.0) min for single lesion, and the mean of total clamping time for single case was 37.5 (32.0–52.0) min. Only the complications of grade 1–2 were found and no positive surgical margin was discovered. The mean follow-up time was 5.4 months and no local recurrence or metastasis was found. The mean postoperative eGFR was 71.2 ml/minute/1.73m² that was only an insignificant reduction (9.3%) compared with the preoperative baseline.

Conclusion

This novel nephron-sparing technique, RPN with sequential SRA clamping, represents a good alternative for selected patients with MIRTs. With the guidance of DSCT and skilled robotic experience, this technique is feasible and can maximize renal function preservation. Large-scale multicenter clinical studies are still needed to further prove these initial outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12894-019-0451-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Trifecta Outcomes in Multifocal Tumors: A Comparison Between Robotic and Open Partial Nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To report a comparative analysis of outcomes in patients who underwent multiple excisions for unilateral synchronous multifocal renal tumors using both open and robotic approaches.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 110 patients who underwent robotic and open partial nephrectomy and had multiple tumor excisions in an ipsilateral kidney. "Trifecta" was defined as negative surgical margins, no urologic complications, and a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) preservation of ≥90% at last follow-up. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to equilibrate treatment groups, minimize selection bias, and optimize inference on the basis of each patient's clinicodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight robotic and 42 open patient approaches had sufficient data for IPTW. After weighting, there were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. On adjusted analyses, robotic partial nephrectomy achieved equivalent rates of trifecta to open surgery (16.3% vs 16.5%, p = 0.99), which persisted on subgroup analyses of patients with two (20.1% vs 23.7%, p = 0.82) or more than two tumors (6.8% vs 7.4%, p = 0.95). There were no differences between robotic and open cohorts for negative margin rates, absence of complications, or GFR ≥90%. The robotic cohort had a shorter mean length of stay (3.4 vs 4.9 days, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical resection remains the mainstay for patients with unilateral, synchronous, and multifocal renal tumors. Our analysis found that both open and robotic approaches to partial nephrectomy are equally likely to achieve the "trifecta" outcome in an equilibrated high-risk group of patients. The robotic approach for these complex patients may be safe and feasible for a carefully selected group of patients.

Conversion of Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy to Radical Nephrectomy: A Prospective Multi-institutional Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence and factors affecting conversion from robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) to radical nephrectomy.

METHODS

Between November 2014 and February 2017, 501 patients underwent attempted RAPN by 22 surgeons at 14 centers in 9 countries within the Vattikuti Collaborative Quality Initiative database. Patients were permanently logged for RAPN prior to surgery and were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Multivariable logistic regression with backward stepwise selection of variables was done to assess the factors associated with conversion to radical nephrectomy.

RESULTS

Overall conversion rate was 25 of 501 (5%). Patients converted to radical nephrectomy were older (median age [interquartile range] 66.0 [61.0-74.0] vs 59.0 [50.0-68.0], P = .012), had higher body mass index (BMI) (median 32.8 [24.9-40.9] vs 27.8 [24.6-31.5] kg/m², P = .031), higher age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity score (median 6.0 [4.0-7.0] vs 4.0 [3.0-5.0], P <.001), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score (score ≥3; 13/25 (52.0%) vs 130/476 (27.3%), P = .021), Preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (P = .141), clinical tumor stage (P = .145), tumor location (P = .140), multifocality (P = .483), and RENAL (radius, exophytic/endophytic properties, nearness of tumor to the collecting system or sinus in millimeters, and anterior/posterior location relative to polar lines) nephrometry score (P = .125) were not significantly different between the groups. On multivariable analysis, independent predictors for conversion were BMI (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]; 1.070 [1.018-1.124]; P = .007) and Charlson score (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]; 1.459 [1.179-1.806]; P = .001).

CONCLUSION

RAPN was associated with a low rate of conversion. Independent predictors of conversion were BMI and Charlson score. Tumor factors such as clinical stage, location, multifocality, or RENAL score were not associated with increased risk of conversion.

Zero ischaemia laparoscopic nephron-sparing surgery by re-suturing

AIM OF THE STUDY

To report a pre-suture technique in laparoscopic nephron-sparing surgery (LNSS), which could help reduce and even avoid ischaemia for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January and June 2013 we treated 14 patients presenting with renal tumours. The mean age was 46 years and average tumour size was 2.4 cm in diameter determined by computed tomography (CT). All the patients were treated with LNSS by pre-suturing the resection.

RESULTS

In 13 out of the 14 cases, no clamping was needed during the whole surgery processes, i.e. zero ischaemia was achieved. In the other case, the renal artery was clamped for only 150 seconds due to suture avulsion. The mean operating time was 75 minutes (range 50 to 110 minutes) and mean blood loss was 60 ml (range 30 to 200 ml). After removal of the drain 2-3 days after surgery, the average postoperative hospital stay time was four days. The surgery had only a minor effect on the renal function. No case of urinary leakage or postoperative bleeding occurred. Postoperative pathological reports showed that the tumours were resected completely with negative surgical margins for all cases. There were no signs of recurrence on follow-up CT performed 1-6 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The pre-suture technique in LNSS reported here required zero or minimal ischaemia time and hence avoided renal ischaemia-reperfusion injury. This surgical technique could be a feasible surgical option for treatment of small, exophytic and peripheral renal tutors.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery: recent advances in urology

The aim of the present review is to summarize recent developments in the field of urologic robotic surgery. A nonsystematic literature review was performed to retrieve publications related to robotic surgery in urology and evidence-based critical analysis was conducted by focusing on the literature of the past 5 years. The use of the da Vinci Surgical System, a robotic surgical system, has been implemented for the entire spectrum of extirpative and reconstructive laparoscopic kidney procedures. The robotic approach can be applied for a range of adrenal indications as well as for ureteral diseases, including benign and malignant conditions affecting the proximal, mid, and distal ureter. Current evidence suggests that robotic prostatectomy is associated with less blood loss compared with the open surgery. Besides prostate cancer, robotics has been used for simple prostatectomy in patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Recent studies suggest that minimally invasive radical cystectomy provides encouraging oncologic outcomes mirroring those reported for open surgery. In recent years, the evolution of robotic surgery has enabled urologic surgeons to perform urinary diversions intracorporeally. Robotic vasectomy reversal and several other robotic andrological applications are being explored. In summary, robotic-assisted surgery is an emerging and safe technology for most urologic operations. The acceptance of robotic prostatectomy during the past decade has paved the way for urologists to explore the entire spectrum of extirpative and reconstructive urologic procedures. Cost remains a significant issue that could be solved by wider dissemination of the technology.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for ≥ 7 cm renal masses: a comparative outcome analysis

OBJECTIVE

To present our robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) experience for renal masses ≥ 7 cm and compare the surgical outcomes in this cohort with those obtained for small (≤ 4 cm) renal masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our institutional review board-approved RPN database and identified patients undergoing RPN for tumors ≥ 7 cm. Surgical technique, renal function, oncologic, and pathologic data were analyzed and compared with the RPN for renal masses ≤ 4 cm.

RESULTS

Overall, 441 patients were identified for the purpose of this study, including 29 cases and 412 controls. Median operative time (200 vs 180 min; P = .005), warm ischemia time (26.5 vs 19 min; P <.001), and estimated blood loss (250 mL [353] vs 150 mL [150]; P <.001) were significantly lower in the control group. Postoperative complications were significantly higher in the case group (37.9% vs 15.8%; P = .005). However, the percentages of major complications (Clavien grade ≥ III) were comparable (18.2% vs 17%; P = .57 for cases and controls respectively). Postoperative blood transfusion was higher for larger tumor group (24.1% vs 4.1%; P <.001). Positive margins were similar between groups (5.9% vs 3.3%; P = .45 for cases and controls respectively). There was no difference in estimated glomerular filtration rate decline between the two groups (12.2% vs 15.8% decline; P = .98).

CONCLUSION

RPN represents a feasible and safe nephron-sparing surgery approach for highly selected (mostly exophytic growth pattern, polar location, and likelihood of benign histology) renal masses ≥ 7 cm in diameter.

A propensity-score matched comparison of perioperative and early renal functional outcomes of robotic versus open partial nephrectomy

Objectives

To compare the perioperative and early renal functional outcomes of RPN with OPN for kidney tumors.

Materials and Methods

A total of 209 RPN or OPN patients with availability of preoperative cross-sectional imaging since 2009 at our center were included. To adjust for potential baseline confounders propensity-score matching was performed, which resulted in 94 OPNs matched to 51 RPNs. Perioperative and early renal functional outcomes were compared.

Results

In propensity-score matched analysis, RPN procedures were well tolerated and resulted in significant decreases in postoperative analgesic time (24 vs. 48 hr, p<0.001) and visual analog pain scale (3 vs. 4, p<0.001). Besides, the RPN patients had a significantly shorter LOS (9 vs. 11 days, p = 0.008) and less EBL (100 vs. 200 ml, p<0.001), but median operative time was significantly longer (229 vs. 182 min, p<0.001). Ischemia time, transfusion rates, complication rates, percentage eGFR decline and CKD upstaging were equivalent after RPN versus OPN. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, RPN patients were less likely to have a prolonged LOS (odds ratio [OR]: 0.409; p = 0.016), while more likely to experience a longer operative time (OR: 4.296; p = 0.001). However, the statistical significance for the protective effect of RPN versus OPN in EBL was not confirmed by examining the risk of EBL≥400 ml (OR: 0.488; p = 0.212).

Conclusions

When adjusted for potential selection biases, RPN offers comparable perioperative and early renal functional outcomes to those of OPN, with the added advantage of improved postoperative pain control and a shorter LOS.

Kidney function after partial nephrectomy: current thinking

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With clinical guidelines recommending partial nephrectomy for small renal masses, it is essential to understand the benefits of partial nephrectomy in regards to renal function. Our objective was to review current evidence and highlight emerging issues for partial nephrectomy and renal function.

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent clinical trial of partial and radical nephrectomy found minimal differences in survival or adverse renal sequelae. However, most observational studies and systematic reviews suggest that partial nephrectomy decreases the risks of adverse renal function, in particular, new-onset severe chronic kidney disease, and improves overall survival. Key features associated with long-term renal function include treatment modality (observation, ablation, surgery), ischemia type and duration, amount of healthy renal preservation, and baseline renal function.

SUMMARY

Partial nephrectomy should remain the standard of care for small renal masses, if the renal tumor size and complexity are amenable to such a surgical approach. Efforts to minimize ischemia time are important for long-term renal functional recovery, and hypothermia should be considered if longer warm ischemia times are anticipated (i.e. >25 min). Although the preliminary results of zero ischemia partial nephrectomy are promising, further research is needed to determine if these surgical techniques are safely adaptable in the broader urologic community.

Three-year oncologic and renal functional outcomes after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

With the wider adoption of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (PN), intermediate- and long-term outcomes data are needed to make firm conclusions about oncologic and functional efficacy, especially for robot-assisted PN (RPN).

OBJECTIVE

To report intermediate-term oncologic and renal functional outcomes of RPN.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We performed a chart review of patients who had undergone RPN since June 2006; patients with a minimum of 2 yr of follow-up were included in this study. Length of follow-up was calculated from the date of surgery to the date of last clinical follow-up. Patients who were either lost to follow-up or who had follow-up outside of our center were sent surveys.

INTERVENTION

Transperitoneal RPN with or without hilar clamping.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data were statistically analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and cancer-free survival (CFS). Upstaging of chronic kidney disease (CKD) was calculated, as well. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to show predicting factors for the latest estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 427 patients, 134 had a minimum follow-up of 2 yr, and 70 had a minimum of 3-6 yr of follow-up. The mean age was 59.1±12.5 yr, body mass index (BMI) was 29.8±6.2 kg/m(2), and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score was 4.2±1.6. The mean tumor size on computed tomography (CT) scan was 3.0±1.6 cm, RENAL score was 7.2±1.8, estimated blood loss (EBL) was 270.7±291.9 ml, operative time was 189.1±54.8 min, and warm ischemia time (WIT) was 17.9±10.3 min. A total of two intraoperative complications (1.5%) and five high-grade Clavien complications (3.7%) occurred. Patients stayed on average for 3.7±1.7 d in the hospital, and the average follow-up was 3.0±0.9 yr. OS was 97.01% at 3 yr and 90.20% at 5 yr; CFS was 98.92% at 3 yr and 98.92% at 5 yr; and CSS was 99.04%, as projected by the Kaplan-Meier method. The mean preoperative GFR was 88.2±0.8 ml/min per 1.73 m(2); the latest postoperative GFR was 80±24 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), with a 8±17.4% change. There was a 20.2% upstaging of CKD postoperatively, but no patients started dialysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reaffirms that RPN is effective in renal function preservation and oncologic control at an intermediate follow-up interval.

Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for complex tumors: comparison of perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

Recent studies showed that robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) offered outcomes at least comparable to those of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). LPN can be particularly challenging for more complex tumors.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing LPN or RPN for a single renal mass of moderate or high complexity.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis was performed for 381 consecutive patients who underwent either LPN (n = 182) or RPN (n = 199) between 2005 and 2011 for a complex renal mass (RENAL score ≥ 7). Perioperative outcomes were compared. Predictors of postoperative renal function were assessed using multivariable linear regression analysis.

INTERVENTION

LPN or RPN.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Perioperative outcomes were compared. Predictors of postoperative renal function were assessed using multivariable linear regression analysis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to patient age, gender, side, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), or tumor size. Patients undergoing LPN had a slightly lower body mass index (29.2 kg/m(2) compared with 30.7 kg/m(2), p = 0.02) and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (81.1 compared with 86.0 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), p = 0.02). LPN was associated with an increased rate of conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN) (11.5% compared with 1%, p<0.001) and a higher decrease in percentage of eGFR (-16.0% compared with -12.6%, p = 0.03). There were no significant differences with respect to warm ischemia time (WIT), estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, or postoperative complications. WIT, preoperative eGFR, and CCI were found to be predictors of postoperative eGFR in multivariable analysis. No difference in perioperative outcomes was found between moderate and high RENAL score subgroups. The retrospective study design was the main limitation of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

RPN provides functional outcomes comparable to those of LPN for moderate- to high-complexity tumors, but with a significantly lower risk of conversion to RN. This situation is likely because of the technical advantages offered by the articulated robotic instruments. A prospective randomized study is needed to confirm these findings.

Robotic partial nephrectomy: The new horizon

Background

There has been an exponential growth in the reporting of series of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN). We review the technique of RPN and the outcomes from large single-centre series of RPN.

Methods

We searched databases to identify original articles related to RPN. For the technical aspects, we describe our technique and provide a general review of previous work. For outcomes, we reviewed previous reports using more rigid criteria, including only single-institution studies with at least 50 patients undergoing RPN.

Results

We found seven retrospective studies that met our criteria, with a total of 701 patients. Mean tumour size was 2.8 cm, with an average R.E.N.A.L. score (Radius, tumour size as maximum diameter; Exophytic/endophytic properties of the tumour, Nearness of tumour deepest portion to the collecting system or sinus, Anterior, a/posterior, p, descriptor, and the Location relative to the polar line) of 6.8. The mean warm ischaemia time was 21 min and mean operative duration was 196 min. The mean estimated blood loss was 182 mL, with a 7.4% transfusion rate. The conversion rate was 1.7% and the postoperative complication rate was 14%. The mean length of stay was 3.6 days. There were positive surgical margins in 1.7% of patients. The mean decrease in renal function was 5.4% and the mean follow-up was 8.4 months.

Conclusions

RPN is feasible and safe for different levels of complexity of renal tumours. Perioperative outcomes are comparable to those found with more established techniques. Future studies should compare different approaches and prioritise prospective and randomised designs.