Repeat robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN): feasibility and early outcomes

Surgical and functional outcomes of repeat robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy compared with repeat open partial nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To examine the surgical and functional outcomes of patients who have undergone repeat open partial nephrectomy (reOPN) or robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (reRAPN).

METHODS

Until May 2022, 3310 patients with renal tumors underwent nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) at affiliated institutions. Of these, 22 and 17 patients who underwent reOPN and reRAPN, respectively, were included in this study.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of sex, age, comorbidities, recurrent tumor size at repeat NSS, interval from recurrence to initial NSS, and nephrometry score. ReRAPN had a shorter operative time (median: 138.0 vs. 214.0 min; p = 0.0023) and less estimated blood loss (median: 50.0 vs. 255.0 mL; p = 0.0261) than reOPN. The incidence of complications with Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2 was higher in the reOPN group than in the reRAPN group (31.8 vs. 5.9%; p = 0.0467). The mean decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate at 3 months postoperatively was not significantly different between the groups. The trifecta achievement rates in the reRAPN (64.7%) and reOPN (27.3%) groups were significantly different (p = 0.0194). On multivariate analysis, age and surgical method were significant predictors of trifecta achievement after partial nephrectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in postoperative renal functional outcomes between reOPN and reRAPN. ReRAPN is superior to reOPN in terms of surgical burden. Therefore, ReRAPN is an important minimally invasive surgery for recurrent renal cell carcinoma.

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.

Comparative analysis of salvage partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy after the failure of initial partial nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To compare the oncologic outcomes and renal function discrepancy of salvage partial nephrectomy (sPN) and salvage radical nephrectomy (sRN) after an initial failed PN.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data from multiple centers between 2008 and 2022 were analyzed in this study. Patients who received sPN or sRN after an initial failed PN were identified. Comparative analysis and propensity score matching (PSM) was performed and the RENAL score, tumor size, and pathological T stage at salvage surgery were used to match the 2 groups. Local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model and log-rank tests. Renal function after salvage surgery was assessed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients who underwent salvage surgery were evaluated, of whom 60 were considered for PSM analysis after matching. At a median follow-up of 27.0 months, LRFS and RFS showed no significant difference between sPN and sRN, either before (LRFS, HR = 0.673 [95% CI: 0.171-2.644], P = 0.610; RFS, HR = 0.744 [95% CI: 0.271-1.344], P = 0.595) or after matching (LRFS, HR = 1.080 [95% CI: 0.067-17.30], P = 0.957; RFS, HR = 1.199 [95% CI: 0.241-5.983], P = 0.822). During long-term follow-up, sPN preserved renal function (after matching, eGFR, 71.4 vs. 54.0, P < 0.001) and prevented eGFR loss (after matching: 6.6% vs. 25.6%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Salvage partial nephrectomy offers a better alternative than sRN for recurrence after initial PN, as sPN preserves renal function better while maintaining parallel tumor control and acceptable complication rates.

How far has robot-assisted partial nephrectomy reached?

Nephron-sparing surgery is the standard treatment for small renal mass (SRM). Nephron-sparing surgery has evolved from an open to a minimally invasive technique. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is the latest technique in this field and is reported to be safe and feasible, showing oncologically and functionally superior or compatible results compared with open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for SRM. This is not limited to only SRM but also applies to large and complex renal masses and other challenging situations. RAPN showed good oncological and functional outcomes for ≥clinical T2 renal tumors, complex renal masses (PADUA score ≥10, RENAL score ≥10), hilar renal tumors, and multiple renal tumors. In addition, the outcomes of RAPN in these challenging cases were not inferior to those in conventional cases. RAPN could also be applied to a number of challenging cases in which the open technique was considered first. RAPN showed good results in patients with a solitary kidney, horseshoe kidney, and in repeat surgeries. Furthermore, RAPN could be safely performed on obese, elderly, and pediatric patients. Finally, this review evaluates efficiency and utility of RAPN based on the results of challenging cases of renal masses and to project the future of RAPN.

Operative and oncological outcomes of salvage robotic radical and partial nephrectomy: a multicenter experience

We aim to describe the perioperative and oncological outcomes for salvage robotic partial nephrectomy (sRPN) and salvage robotic radical nephrectomy (sRRN). Using a prospectively maintained multi-institutional database, we compared baseline clinical characteristics and perioperative and postoperative outcomes, including pathological stage, tumor histology, operative time, ischemia time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), postoperative complication rate, recurrence rate, and mortality. We identified a total of 58 patients who had undergone robotic salvage surgery for a recurrent renal mass, of which 22 (38%) had sRRN and 36 (62%) had sRPN. Ischemia time for sRPN was 14 min. The median EBL was 100 mL in both groups (p = 0.581). One intraoperative complication occurred during sRRN, while three occurred during sRPN cases (p = 1.000). The median LOS was 2 days for sRRN and 1 day for sRPN (p = 0.039). Postoperatively, one major complication occurred after sRRN and two after sRPN (p = 1.000). The recurrence reported after sRRN was 5% and 3% after sRPN. Among the patients who underwent sRRN, the two most prevalent stages were pT1a (27%) and pT3a (27%). Similarly, the two most prevalent stages in sRPN patients were pT1a (69%) and pT3a (6%). sRRN and sRPN have similar operative and perioperative outcomes. sRPN is a safe and feasible procedure when performed by experienced surgeons. Future studies on large cohorts are essential to better characterize the importance and benefit of salvage partial nephrectomies.

Redo Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Recurrent Renal Tumors: A Multi-Institutional Analysis

INTRODUCTION

As the experience with robot assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) grows, the indications have expanded to incorporate previously operated ipsilateral kidneys with recurrent renal masses. We sought to analyze the outcomes of redo RAPN in patients with a recurrent renal mass.

METHODS

Using a multi-institutional series, the data of 72 patients who underwent RAPN for a recurrent renal mass between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with familial renal cell carcinoma and multiple renal tumors were excluded. Major complication defined by Clavien grade ≥3. The median follow-up was 28.5 months. Baseline demographics, clinical and tumor characteristics, perioperative and postoperative outcomes are reported.

RESULTS

Our cohort consisted of a combination of previous thermal ablation (19.6%), laparoscopic (19.6%), open (26.1%), and robotic (34.8%) partial nephrectomy. The median RENAL score was 8. Twenty percent had hilar tumors and 9.7% had a solitary kidney. RAPN was completed in all cases. Two cases (2.8%) were converted to open surgery. None of the cases were converted to radical nephrectomy intraoperatively. One patient underwent radical nephrectomy postoperatively due to bleeding. Transfusion rate was 5.9% and major complication rate was 8.3%. Median length of stay was 3 days. eGFR preservation was 78.7% at discharge and 90.8% at one-year follow-up. Positive surgical margin rate was 8.3%. Overall, distant recurrence was seen in 11 patients (15.3%), however, only one patient had local progression (1.4%).

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, RAPN is an effective approach to treat select cases of locally recurrent renal masses with promising perioperative and functional outcomes. Patients should be carefully monitored for distant recurrence.

Current strategies to diagnose and manage of positive surgical margins and local recurrence after partial nephrectomy

Objective

No standard strategy for diagnosis and management of positive surgical margin (PSM) and local recurrence after partial nephrectomy (PN) are reported in literature. This review aims to provide an overview of the current strategies and further perspectives on this patient setting.

Methods

A non-systematic review of the literature was completed. The research included the most updated articles (about the last 10 years).

Results

Techniques for diagnosing PSMs during PN include intraoperative frozen section, imprinting cytology, and other specific tools. No clear evidence is reported about these methods. Regarding PSM management, active surveillance with a combination of imaging and laboratory evaluation is the first option line followed by surgery. Regarding local recurrence management, surgery is the primary curative approach when possible but it may be technically difficult due to anatomy resultant from previous PN. In this scenario, thermal ablation (TA) may have the potential to circumvent these limitations representing a less invasive alternative. Salvage surgery represents a valid option; six studies analyzed the outcomes of nephrectomy on local recurrence after PN with three of these focused on robotic approach. Overall, complication rates of salvage surgery are higher compared to TA but ablation presents a higher recurrence rate up to 25% of cases that can often be managed with repeat ablation.

Conclusion

Controversy still exists surrounding the best strategy for management and diagnosis of patients with PSMs or local recurrence after PN. Active surveillance is likely to be the optimal first-line management option for most patients with PSMs. Ablation and salvage surgery both represent valid options in patients with local recurrence after PN. Conversely, salvage PN and radical nephrectomy have fewer recurrences but are associated with a higher complication rate compared to TA. In this scenario, robotic surgery plays an important role in improving salvage PN and radical nephrectomy outcomes.

Salvage Robot-assisted Renal Surgery for Local Recurrence After Surgical Resection or Renal Mass Ablation: Classification, Techniques, and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Salvage treatment for local recurrence after prior partial nephrectomy (PN) or local tumor ablation (LTA) for kidney cancer is, as of yet, poorly investigated.

OBJECTIVE

To classify the treatments and standardize the nomenclature of salvage robot-assisted renal surgery, to describe the surgical technique for each scenario, and to investigate complications, renal function, and oncologic outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-seven patients underwent salvage robot-assisted renal surgery from October 2010 to December 2020 at nine tertiary referral centers.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

Salvage robot-assisted renal surgery classified according to treatment type as salvage robot-assisted partial or radical nephrectomy (sRAPN or sRARN) and according to previous primary treatment (PN or LTA).

MEASUREMENTS

Postoperative complications, renal function, and oncologic outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 32 and 35 patients underwent salvage robotic surgery following PN and LTA, respectively. After prior PN, two patients underwent sRAPN, while ten underwent sRARN for a metachronous recurrence in the same kidney. No intra- or perioperative complication occurred. For local recurrence in the resection bed, six patients underwent sRAPN, while 14 underwent sRARN. For sRAPN, the intraoperative complication rate was 33%; there was no postoperative complication. For sRARN, there was no intraoperative complication and the postoperative complication rate was 7%. At 3 yr, the local recurrence-free rates were 64% and 82% for sRAPN and sRARN, respectively, while the 3-yr metastasis-free rates were 80% and 79%, respectively. At 33 mo, the median estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) were 57 and 45 ml/min/1.73 m² for sRAPN and sRARN, respectively. After prior LTA, 35 patients underwent sRAPN and no patient underwent sRARN. There was no intraoperative complication; the overall postoperative complications rate was 20%. No local recurrence occurred. The 3-yr metastasis-free rate was 90%. At 43 mo, the median eGFR was 38 ml/min/1.73 m². The main limitations are the relatively small population and the noncomparative design of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage robot-assisted surgery has a safe complication profile in the hands of experienced surgeons at high-volume institutions, but the risk of local recurrence in this setting is non-negligible.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients with local recurrence after partial nephrectomy or local tumor ablation should be aware that further treatment with robot-assisted surgery is not associated with a worrisome complication profile, but also that they are at risk of further recurrence.

Percutaneous Ablation Versus Surgical Resection for Local Recurrence Following Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Cancer: A Propensity Score Analysis (REPART Study-UroCCR 71)

BACKGROUND

Data comparing percutaneous ablation (PCA) and surgical resection (SR) for an isolated local recurrence (LR) following partial nephrectomy (PN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the outcomes between PCA and SR for an isolated LR following PN for RCC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients who underwent PN for RCC and developed an LR between 2013 and 2019 were included. An LR was defined as the appearance of a mass in contact with the resection bed or the development of a tumor in the same region of the homolateral kidney as the original site.

INTERVENTION

PCA or SR.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

To achieve balance in baseline characteristics, we used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity to receive treatment. Oncological outcomes, complications, and renal function were evaluated between groups using logistic, linear, and Cox proportional hazard regression models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 81 patients with an isolated LR were included (PCA: 42; SR: 39). The median follow-up was 23 mo. After adjustment, excellent balance was achieved for the majority of propensity score variables. In IPTW analysis, PCA was associated with a lower risk of postoperative complications (odds ratio=0.22; p=0.006) and a smaller change in eGFR (beta=-16.18; p=0.001). There were no significant differences in the risk of disease recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]=0.72; p=0.61), new LR (HR=1.51; p=0.59), and distant metastasis (HR=0.19; p=0.09). Limitations include the sample size and unmeasured confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that PCA provides comparable oncological outcomes to repeat surgery with fewer complications and better renal function preservation for the management of an LR after PN.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This report shows that percutaneous ablation can be used for treating a local recurrence of renal cell carcinoma after partial nephrectomy, without significantly compromising cancer control.

Clinical outcomes of repeat partial nephrectomy compared to initial partial nephrectomy of a solitary kidney

BACKGROUND

When local recurrence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) occurs after nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) on the ipsilateral side, some surgeons hesitate to perform reoperative surgery because of possible difficulties. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of repeat partial nephrectomy (RePN) compared with those of initial partial nephrectomy (iPN) for RCC of a solitary kidney.

METHODS

Until September 2017, 1671 patients with renal tumors underwent NSS. Of these, 79 patients who underwent NSS for sporadic RCC of a solitary kidney were included. Parameters were compared using the Mann-Whitney U, Pearson Chi-square, and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Eleven patients underwent RePN and 68 underwent iPN. The RePN group had a relatively smaller tumor size (p = 0.0432), longer operative time (p = 0.0432), and higher estimated blood loss (p = 0.0002) than the iPN group. No significant differences in the other clinical factors were found between the groups. The rates of perioperative complications greater than Clavien-Dindo grade II were 18.2% and 17.6% in the RePN group and iPN group, respectively. The mean decreasing rate of estimated glomerular filtration rate was not different between the groups at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. No significant differences were found in hemodialysis-free survival (p = 0.7392) and intrarenal recurrence-free survival (p = 0.4924) between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes of RePN were not significantly different compared with those of iPN for patients with sporadic RCC of a solitary kidney. RePN is technically feasible with acceptable complication and local recurrence rates with better postoperative kidney function.

Systematic Review of the Management of Local Kidney Cancer Relapse

CONTEXT

Management of locally recurrent renal cancer is complex.

OBJECTIVE

In this systematic review we analyse the available literature on the management of local renal cancer recurrence.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic search (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Clinical Trials, and Scopus) of English literature from 2000 to 2017 was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The search identified 1838 articles. Of those, 36 were included in the evidence synthesis. The majority of the studies identified were retrospective and not controlled. Local recurrence after thermal ablation (TA) may be managed with repeat TA. Alternatively, salvage nephrectomy is possible. However, a higher rate of complications should be expected than after primary nephrectomy. Salvage nephrectomy and TA represent treatment options for local recurrence after partial nephrectomy. Local retroperitoneal recurrence after radical nephrectomy is ideally treated with surgical resection, for which minimally invasive approaches might be applicable to select patients. For large recurrences, addition of intraoperative radiation may improve local control. Local tumour destruction appears to be more beneficial than systemic therapy alone for local recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of local renal cancer relapse varies according to the clinical course and prior treatments. The available data are mainly limited to noncontrolled retrospective series. After nephron-sparing treatment, TA represents an effective treatment with low morbidity. For local recurrence after radical nephrectomy, the low-level evidence available suggests superiority of surgical excision relative to systemic therapy or best supportive care. As a consequence, surgery should be prioritised when feasible and applicable.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In renal cell cancer, the occurrence and management of local recurrence depend on the initial treatment. This cancer is a disease with a highly variable clinical course. After initial organ-sparing treatment, thermal ablation offers good cancer control and low rates of complications. For recurrence after radical nephrectomy, surgical excision seems to provide the best long-term cancer control and it is superior to medical therapy alone.

Robotics in urology

Twenty years after it was introduced, robotic surgery has become more commonplace in urology – we examine its current uses and controversies

Current status of robotic surgery in urology

As a result of ergonomics, optimal magnification of the operative field, surgeon dexterity, and precision of surgical manipulation, robotic technology has been shown to overcome many difficulties associated with pure laparoscopy. With the recent expansion of robot-assisted surgery in the field of urology and following the success of robot-assisted prostatectomy and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy, robot-assisted surgery is being applied to treat many other genitourinary diseases, such as bladder cancer and ureteropelvic junction obstruction. The aim of the present review is to discuss the role of robotic surgery in urology and summarize recent developments in the field of urologic robotic surgery.

Precision surgery and genitourinary cancers

The landscape of the surgical management of urologic malignancies has dramatically changed over the past 20 years. On one side, better diagnostic and prognostic tools allowed better patient selection and more reliable surgical planning. On the other hand, the implementation of minimally invasive techniques and technologies, such as robot-assisted laparoscopy surgery and image-guided surgery, allowed minimizing surgical morbidity. Ultimately, these advances have translated into a more tailored approach to the management of urologic cancer patients. Following the paradigm of "precision medicine", contemporary urologic surgery has entered a technology-driven era of "precision surgery", which entails a range of surgical procedures tailored to combine maximal treatment efficacy with minimal impact on patient function and health related quality of life. Aim of this non-systematic review is to provide a critical analysis of the most recent advances in the field of surgical uro-oncology, and to define the current and future role of "precision surgery" in the management of genitourinary cancers.

Repeat Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Characteristics, Complications, and Renal Functional Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Multifocal and hereditary kidney cancers often require repeated ipsilateral nephron sparing procedures with higher blood loss and complication rates compared to first time renal surgery. Consequently, many surgeons avoid minimally invasive techniques in the setting. We present the characteristics, complications, and short-term renal functional outcomes of patients who underwent a repeat robotic partial nephrectomy (rRPNx).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who underwent robotic partial nephrectomies between January 2007 and December 2013. Selection criteria for the rRPNx cohort included patients who had undergone at least two ipsilateral renal surgeries, with the second procedure being an rRPNx. All other patients comprised the initial robotic partial nephrectomy (iRPNx) group.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-four patients who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy during the study period were identified. rRPNx constituted 26 (21%) of the total cases. Age of the rRPNx cohort was similar (p = 0.56), but number of tumors resected was two-fold greater in the rRPNx group (p = 0.44). Neither surgery time nor renal clamp time was significantly longer in either group (p = 0.18 and p = 0.65, respectively). Importantly, estimated blood loss (EBL) was significantly larger than in the iRPNx group (p = 0.01). Both groups had similar intravenous pain medication administration durations (p = 0.32), but postsurgical length of stay was greater for the rRPNx patients (p = 0.011). There were no significant differences in clavian complication rates (p = 0.17-0.39), with the exception of urine leak which occurred more frequently in the rRPNx group (p = 0.01). There was no difference in percent change in serum creatinine or estimated glomerular filtration rate (p = 0.89 and p = 0.67, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

rRPNx is safe and feasible in select patients. EBL, postoperative lengths of stay, and urine leak were the only factors significantly associated with rRPNx compared to iRPNx. Patient 3-month follow-up revealed excellent and comparable outcomes between the two groups.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

Partial nephrectomy is the standard treatment for small renal masses. Currently, it is commonly performed using minimally invasive approaches, including laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques. The aim of the present review is to report the surgical technique of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in full detail as well as available literature results.

Salvage Percutaneous Cryoablation for Locally Recurrent Renal-Cell Carcinoma After Primary Cryoablation

BACKGROUND

The management of locally recurrent renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) following cryoablation remains a clinical dilemma. There is limited data regarding the management of locally recurrent disease in the setting of patients who have failed initial percutaneous cryoablation (PCA). We evaluate and report our experience with salvage PCA for local recurrence following renal cryoablation failure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed our experience with patients who underwent salvage PCA for local biopsy proven RCC recurrence following primary cryoablation procedures. Complications and oncologic outcomes were evaluated. Recurrence-free survival after primary and repeat cryoablation was plotted using the Kaplan-Meier curves.

RESULTS

A total 250 patients underwent primary cryoablation for RCC and 20 (8%) patients were identified who underwent repeat PCA for 21 locally recurrent tumors. The mean tumor size was 2.4 cm. Biopsy revealed clear cell in 14 patients, three papillary and four chromophobe RCC. All repeat cryoablation procedures were completed successfully, with no treatment failures on postprocedure imaging. There were no complications or deaths. With the median follow-up of 30 months (range 7-63), 3 (15%) patients experienced local recurrence. One patient had an enhancing lesion at 13 months following repeat PCA and underwent a third PCA. Two patients had recurrence at 6 and 35 months respectively and underwent successful laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Local recurrence-free, metastasis-free and cancer-specific survival rates were 85%, 100%, and 100% respectively. Limitations include retrospective design and small number of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat PCA after primary cryoablation failure is feasible, has a low complication rate, and acceptable short-term oncologic outcomes. Further studies with durable follow-up are required.

Outlining the limits of partial nephrectomy

Amongst nephron-sparing modalities, partial nephrectomy (PN) is the standard of care in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Despite the increasing utilization of PN, particularly propagated by robot-assisted, minimally invasive approaches for small renal masses (SRMs), the limits of PN appear to be also evolving. In this review, we sought to address the tumour stage beyond which PN may be oncologically perilous. While the evidence supports PN in the treatment of tumours < pT2a, PN may have a role in advanced or metastatic RCC. Other scenarios wherein PN has limited utility are also explored, including anatomical or surgical factors that dictate the difficulty of the case, such as prior renal surgery. Lastly, we discuss the emerging role of molecular biomarkers, specifically epigenetics, to aid in the risk stratification of SRMs and to select tumours optimally suited for PN.

Outcomes and limitations of laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this review article is to summarize and critically analyze the studies published in the previous year and report perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent case series studies evaluating LPN confirmed the good oncologic results of this approach at intermediate and long-term follow-ups. Recent studies investigating RAPN confirmed the promising perioperative outcomes reported in the initial case series. Many studies tested and demonstrated the feasibility of both procedures in the treatment of very complex cases represented by tumors larger than 4 cm, hilar/central tumors, endophytic tumors, or tumors located in solitary kidney. Comparative studies confirm advantages in favor of RAPN in comparison with LPN, mainly in terms of warm ischemia time and perioperative outcomes. A recent matched pair analysis showed equivalent perioperative and functional outcomes between RAPN and open partial nephrectomy (OPN).

SUMMARY

LPN and above all RAPN represent valid alternatives to OPN in the conservative treatment of renal tumors. Both procedures can be proposed also for the treatment of complex cases. Further, well conducted, comparative studies between RAPN and OPN are needed to test the ability of RAPN as an alternative to OPN in the treatment of more complex cases.

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.