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

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.

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.

Segmental artery clamping versus main renal artery clamping in nephron-sparing surgery: updated meta-analysis

Objectives

Ischemia–reperfusion injury is harmful in partial nephrectomy (PN) in renal cell carcinoma. Choosing an appropriate surgical method is important to reduce ischemia–reperfusion injury. This study aimed to compare the effect of segmental artery clamping (SAC) and main renal artery clamping (MAC) on patients who underwent PN.

Methods

Studies from January 2008 to November 2019 were identified by an electronic search of English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Excerpt Medica Database, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, VIP, and Chinese National Knowledge Internet, without language restriction. Two reviewers were involved in the trial. The effects on operation time (OT), warm ischemia time (WIT), length of hospital stay (LOS), blood transfusion rate, postoperative complication rate, Clavien classification (≥ 3), and positive surgery margin (PSM) were evaluated using Stata software. Standardized mean difference (SMD, for continuous data) and pooled odds ratios (for count data) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect indicators.

Results

Thirty-two studies were included. SAC decreased the 1-week (SMD = − 0.973; 95% CI = − 1.414, − 0.532; P = 0.000), 1-month (SMD = − 0.411; 95% CI = − 0.769, − 0.053; P = 0.025), and 3-month (affected kidney: SMD = − 0.914; 95% CI = − 1.662, − 0.617; P = 0.000) percentages of postoperative changes in renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate) between the SAC and MAC groups. Sub-group analysis showed that the SAC group had longer OT (SMD = 0.562; 95% CI = 0.252, 0.871; P = 0.000) than the MAC group. However, no differences were observed in the OT, WIT, LOS, blood transfusion rate, postoperative complication rate, Clavien classification (≥ 3), and PSM between the two groups.

Conclusions

SAC is superior to MAC in terms of short-term postoperative renal function recovery. The use of SAC or MAC depends on tumor size, location, surgical modality, and surgeon’s judgments.