You have accessJournal of UrologyTechnology & Instruments: Robotics - Malignant Disease & Benign Disease II1 Apr 20121399 DOES PURE ROBOTIC PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY PROVIDE SIMILAR PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES WHEN COMPARED TO THE COMBINED LAPAROSCOPIC-ROBOTIC APPROACH? Andrew Harbin, Xi Cheng, Vincent Stanford, Kevin McGeagh, Jonah Murdock, Reza Ghasemian, Gaurav Bandi, and Jonathan Hwang Andrew HarbinAndrew Harbin Washington, DC More articles by this author , Xi ChengXi Cheng Washington, DC More articles by this author , Vincent StanfordVincent Stanford Washington, DC More articles by this author , Kevin McGeaghKevin McGeagh Washington, DC More articles by this author , Jonah MurdockJonah Murdock Washington, DC More articles by this author , Reza GhasemianReza Ghasemian Washington, DC More articles by this author , Gaurav BandiGaurav Bandi Washington, DC More articles by this author , and Jonathan HwangJonathan Hwang Washington, DC More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1848AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) has become the preferred option for surgical management of incidentally discovered renal masses. Robotic surgery offers the advantages of a laparoscopic access while minimizing the technical difficulty of laparoscopic intracorporeal suturing. Currently there is no consensus on which aspects of the procedure should be performed laparoscopically versus robotically. We believe that combining a laparoscopic exposure and hilar dissection with a robotic extirpation and renorrhaphy provides improved perioperative outcomes compared to a pure robotic approach. We performed a comparison of perioperative outcomes between combined laparoscopic-robotic partial nephrectomy (LRPN) and pure robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN). METHODS A multi-center retrospective analysis of patients undergoing RPN and LRPN using the Da Vinci S system ® was performed. LRPN consisted of a laparoscopic exposure and hilar dissection, and the robot was docked for extirpation and renorrhaphy. Patient charts were reviewed for perioperative variables. Statistical analysis was performed using R ® statistical program. RESULTS Thirty-one patients underwent RPN while 81 patients underwent LRPN between 2007-2011. Four patients in the LRPN group were excluded due coversion to total nephrectomy. Preoperative variables were similar between each group, with the exception of lesion size and nephrometry score (Table 1). Length of surgery, estimated blood loss and morphine used were significantly less in the LRPN group, while warm ischemia time (WIT) was significantly longer (Table 2). The difference in WIT disappeared after controlling for nephrometry score. There was no significant difference in perioperative creatinine. Table 1. Perioperative Demographic Information Patient Characteristic Lap-Robotic Pure Robotic T-Test Patients 77 81 Age 60 60 Male 39 (48%) 22 (70%) Female 41 (52%) 9 (30%) BMI 30.2 31 Lesion Size 3.5 2.6 *p < 0.05 Nephrometry Score 6.2 4.7 ***p < 0.001 Table 2. Perioperative Outcomes Perioperative Variable Lap-Robotic Pure Robotic T Test Warm Ischemia Time (min) 28 18.5 ***p < 0.001 Length of Surgery (min) 173.8 211.9 ***p < 0.001 Estimated Blood Loss (ml) 139.3 271.9 ***p < 0.001 Length of Stay (days) 2.4 2.6 Mg of IV Morphine 19.7 32.4 *p < 0.05 Preoperative Creatinine 1.1 1.2 Postoperative Creatinine 1.2 1.2 Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma 37 (48%) 12 (39%) Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma 23 (30%) 9 (29%) Benign Mass 14 (19%) 10 (32%) Other 2 (3%) 0 Minor Complications 5 3 Major Complications 2 1 CONCLUSIONS The combined LRPN approach was associated with a shorter operative time, reduced blood loss and lower narcotic usage. This finding may translate into a reduced utilization of hospital resources and cost. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e567-e568 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Andrew Harbin Washington, DC More articles by this author Xi Cheng Washington, DC More articles by this author Vincent Stanford Washington, DC More articles by this author Kevin McGeagh Washington, DC More articles by this author Jonah Murdock Washington, DC More articles by this author Reza Ghasemian Washington, DC More articles by this author Gaurav Bandi Washington, DC More articles by this author Jonathan Hwang Washington, DC More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract