The First Assistant Sparing Technique Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy Decreases Warm Ischemia Time While Maintaining Good Perioperative Outcomes

Abstract

Prolonged warm ischemia time (WIT) and operative time (OT) during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) can adversely affect renal function and clinical outcomes. Minimizing the duration of WIT and OT is critical to achieving good results postoperatively. Our standard technique for RAPN has evolved into an intracorporeal preparation (ICP) that minimizes the reliance on the first assistant. The goal of the current study was to analyze outcomes after ICP RAPN compared with those of the standard RAPN. A retrospective review of all patients who underwent RAPN was performed, comparing standard vs ICP technique. The ICP approach involves tacking of preprepared sutures along the abdominal sidewall adjacent to the kidney in preparation for hemostasis and renorrhaphy before arterial clamping, the use of robotic Scanlan(®) Reliance, bulldog clamps preplaced near the hilum of the kidney, and "sliding-clip" renorrhaphy. We compared intraoperative (OT, WIT, estimated blood loss [EBL]) and pre/postoperative outcomes (serum creatinine, glomerular filtration rate [GFR], length of stay [LOS]) of RAPN between the ICP and standard approach. A total of 44 consecutive RAPNs (18 ICP, 26 standard) were performed. Median nephrometry score was 7a, and mean follow-up was 13 months. Mean tumor size was 2.4 cm, and most common stage was T(1a). There was no significant difference between ICP and standard RAPN with regard to nephrometry score and stage. Mean WIT was significantly lower for the ICP vs standard RAPN (19 vs 23 min, P=0.049) as was mean OT (161 vs 204 min, P=0.027). On multivariate analysis, ICP RAPN was an independent predictor of WIT (P=0.02). There was no significant impact on preoperative and postoperative GFR for either approach. EBL and LOS were similar between the two groups. The ICP RAPN leads to a significant reduction in WIT and OT while maintaining similar perioperative outcomes compared with the standard approach.