Retroperitoneal Partial Nephrectomy Research Articles

The effect of 11th rib excision on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for upper pole renal tumors.

We aimed to evaluate the effect of eleven11th rib resection.on the perioperative period TRIFECTA criteria in patients who underwent retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy (PN) with the diagnosis of upper pole kidney tumors. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the data of the patients who underwent Open PN for upper pole renal masses between 2018 and 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: PN with rib resection and PN without rib resection. The demographic characteristics, tumor sizes, PADUA scores, warm-cold renal ischemia times, mass excision and tumor bed suturing times, histopathological tumor type and surgical margin positivity of the patients were examined. Both groups were evaluated comparatively based on this data. The renal nephrometry scores of the two groups were similar. The total renal ischemia time was significantly shorter in the patients who underwent a rib resection than in those who did not (p < 0.001). Both the tumor excision and tumor bed suturing times were significantly shorter in the group that underwent a rib resection than in the group that did not (p < 0.001). The Clavien-Dindo complication grades were statistically similar between the two groups. Complex in nature and high-risk renal masses located in the upper pole of the kidney, partial nephrectomy performed with an 11th rib resection can be considered a reliable surgical option with a shorter ischemia time, supporting the preservation of long-term renal function.

Comparison of lateral flank approach and low anterior access for single port (SP) retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy: an analysis from the single port advanced research consortium (SPARC).

Single Port (SP) robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) can be performed via retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approach. We aim to compare outcomes of two commonly described incisions for retroperitoneal SP RPN: lateral flank approach (LFA) and low anterior access (LAA). We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent SP retroperitoneal RPN from 2018 to 2023 as part of a large multi-institute collaboration (SPARC). Baseline demographic, clinical, tumor-specific characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were compared using χ2, t test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using robust and logistic regressions. A total of 70 patients underwent SP retroperitoneal RPN, with 44 undergoing LAA. Overall, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The LAA group exhibited significantly lower median RENAL scores (8 vs. 5, p < 0.001) and more varied tumor locations (p = 0.002). In the bivariate analysis, there were no statistically significant differences in ischemia time, estimated blood loss, or complication rates between the groups. However, the LAA group had longer operative times (101 vs. 134min, p < 0.001), but was more likely to undergo a same-day discharge (p < 0.001). When controlling for other variables, LAA was associated with shorter ischemia time (p = 0.005), but there was no significant difference in operative time (p = 0.348) and length of stay (p = 0.122). Both LFA and LAA are acceptable approaches for SP retroperitoneal RPN with comparable perioperative outcomes. This early data suggests the LAA is more versatile for varying tumor locations; however, larger cohort studies are needed to ascertain whether there is an overall difference in patient recovery.

A novel mini-retractor for retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

Retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy (RLPN) is the premier treatment for localized renal tumors despite narrow operation space. Many efforts have been taken to facilitate the operation of RLPN, but the optimal resolution remains debatable. To explore the feasibility of using Mini-lap to improve workspace and surgical vision in RLPN. A multicenter retrospective review of 51 patients who underwent RLPN with Mini-lap from January 2018 to December 2020 was conducted. Standard RLPN under three poles was performed in all cases. We highlighted the usage of Mini-lap (Teleflex Minilap percutaneous Surgical System) as a novel retractor in RLPN. Demographics, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. All 51 cases completed RLPN with three ports successfully and no conversion to open surgery. The mean diameter of tumors was (3.53 ± 1.05) cm, in which 62.7% (32/51) were located anteriorly. The operation time and warm ischemic time (WIT) were (86.7 ± 15.9) min and (25.6 ± 5) min respectively. Minor complications (Clavien grade 1-2) occurred in 6 cases. The limitations were small sample size, retrospective design, and absence of control. Mini-lap could be used as a mini-retractor in RLPN, sparing extra assistant ports, expanding workspace, and optimizing vision. With highlights of larger workspace and less instrument interference, mini-lap could be applied in retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

Robot-assisted single-port retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy with a novel purpose-built single-port robotic system with deformable surgical instruments

ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and feasibility of using a novel purpose-built single-port robotic system (the SHURUI Robotic Surgical System) with deformable surgical instruments to perform retroperitoneal single-port partial nephrectomy.Materials and methodsA prospective study was conducted to recruit patients with a single renal tumor no more than 4 cm. Robot-assisted single-port partial nephrectomy was performed by using the novel purpose-built single-port robotic system with deformable surgical instruments. Patients’ demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative parameters were recorded and analyzed.ResultsSixteen patients were recruited to the study. The median tumor size was 2.0 cm (IQR: 1.2–2.4 cm). The median R.E.N.A.L score was 6 (IQR: 4–4.5). In 3 cases, pure single-port surgery was carried out, and all the assistance was through the robotic port. Median docking time was 15.5 min (IQR: 14.25–22.25 min). Median operating time was 148.5 min (IQR: 178–238.5 min). Median console time was 107 min (IQR: 92.75–149.75 min). Median warm ischemic time was 26.5 min (IQR: 24.5–30 min). Median blood loss was 17.5 ml (IQR: 10–50 ml).ConclusionsRetroperitoneal partial nephrectomy can be safely performed with this novel purpose-built single-port robotic system (SHURUI) with deformable surgical instruments. Further studies are needed to fully evaluate the role of this new platform.

Transperitoneal vs. Retroperitoneal Approach in Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for Posterior Renal Tumors: A Retrospective, Multi-Center, Comparative Study

Purpose: The aim of our study is to compare the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic transperitoneal partial nephrectomy (LTPN) and laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy (LRPN) for posterior cT1 renal tumors. Methods: We retrospectively collected data on all patients who consecutively underwent LTPN and LRPN for posterior cT1 renal tumors in three different centers from January 2015 to January 2023. Patients with a single, unilateral, cT1 renal mass, located in the posterior renal surface were included. Patients’ data regarding perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes were collected from medical records and statistically analyzed and compared. Results: A total of 128 patients was obtained, with 53 patients in the LPTN group and 75 patients in the LRPN group. Baseline characteristics were similar. Warm ischemia time (WIT) (18.8 vs. 22.6 min, p = 0.002) and immediate postoperative eGFR drop (−6.1 vs. −13.0 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.047) were significantly lower in the LPTN group. Estimated blood loss (EBL) (100 vs. 150 mL, p = 0.043) was significantly lower in the LRPN group. All other perioperative and functional outcomes and complications were similar between the groups. The positive surgical margin (PSM) rate was lower in the LRPN group, although without statistical significance (7.2% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.258). Surgical success defined by Trifecta (WIT ≤ 25 min, no PSM, and no major postoperative complication) was similar between both approaches. Conclusions: LTPN has significantly shorter WIT and a significantly smaller drop in immediate eGFR when compared to LRPN for posterior renal tumors. On the other hand, LRPN has significantly less EBL than LTPN. LRPN demonstrated fewer PSMs than LTPN, albeit without statistical significance. In terms of overall surgical success, as defined by Trifecta, both approaches achieved similar results.

Technique and outcomes of robotic-assisted retroperitoneal radical nephrectomy.

Robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy (rRPN) has numerous advantages over transperitoneal surgery, including direct access to the renal hilum and posterior tumors, and avoidance of the peritoneal cavity in patients with a hostile abdomen. Although the use of the retroperitoneal approach has increased over the last decade, there is little literature on robotic retroperitoneal radical nephrectomy (rRRN), which has similar benefits over the transperitoneal approach. The aim of this study was to describe our technique for robotic retroperitoneal nephrectomy (rRN) and assess its feasibility and outcomes at a high-volume center. A retrospective review of patients who underwent some form of rRN [rRRN, robotic retroperitoneal simple nephrectomy (rRSN), or robotic retroperitoneal nephroureterectomy (rRNU)] at a single institution between 2013 and 2023. Patient characteristics, operative data, and postoperative complication rates were assessed. The technique for rRN was detailed. A total of 13 renal units in 12 patients were included for analysis (7 rRRN, 5 rRSN, 1 rRNU). Median patient age was 64.0 years, and median body mass index (BMI) was 36.0 kg/m2. Indications for retroperitoneal surgery were prior abdominal surgery in all patients, including three with bowel diversions, super morbid central obesity in two patients, and a large ventral hernia in one patient. Median operative time was 213 minutes and median estimated blood loss (EBL) was 85 cc. Median postoperative length of stay (LOS) was 3 days, and only one patient experienced a Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complication within 90 days of surgery. The retroperitoneal approach for robotic-assisted nephrectomy is feasible and associated with similar outcomes as the transperitoneal approach. This approach may prove beneficial in select patients with significant prior abdominal surgery including those who are morbidly obese.

Is intraoperative ultrasonography necessary in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for exophytic tumours?

Introduction The value of IOUS has been proven especially for endophytic kidney tumours, but has not been assessed critically for exophytic kidney tumours. We aimed to evaluate the value of IOUS for exophytic kidney tumours. Material and methods The data of LPN cases were collected prospectively between 2000 and 2022. Thirty-two of 535 patients who underwent laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy without IOUS were matched with the IOUS applied cases according to tumour size, tumour localization and PADUA score. Results There were no differences between the two groups in terms of the matching parameters. The average warm ischemia time was 14 min for the IOUS group (range 9–32 min) and 20 min for the non-IOUS group (range 7–52 min) (p = 0.01). Also, the average cutting time was shorter in the IOUS group (6 min vs 9 min) (p = 0.046). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of suturing times (8 min vs 8.5 min) (p = 0.66). The average tumour size was 3.5 cm and pathologically-proven residual tumour was detected in one patient in each group. Conclusion The use of IOUS in laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for exophytic kidney tumours may shorten the warm ischemia time by reducing the cutting time.

Long term experience of robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy as the default approach in the management of renal masses: should the paradigm shift?

Although retroperitoneal surgery has demonstrated a better quality of recovery compared to transperitoneal routes, Retroperitoneal Robot Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RRAPN) remains proportionally infrequent. As the boundaries of what is achievable robotically continue to be pushed, we present our experience at a high-volume tertiary referral centre that specialises in retroperitoneal surgery, exploring its feasibility as standard of care in the management of small renal masses. A prospective database of 784 RAPNs (2009-2020) was reviewed and 721 RRAPNs (92%) were performed at our centre. In our practice, we utilise a four-port approach to RRAPN. Patient, tumour and operative characteristics were assessed and both oncological outcomes and trifecta and pentafecta achievements were determined. Pentafecta was defined as achieving trifecta (negative surgical margin, no post-operative complications and WIT of < 25min) plus over 90% estimated GFR preservation and no CKD stage upgrading at 1year. Multivariate analysis was conducted to predict peri-operative factors which may prevent achieving a trifecta/pentafecta outcome. From 784 cases, 112 RAPNs were performed for imperative reasons, whilst the remainder were elective. Mean BMI ± s.d amongst our cohort was 28.6 ± 5.7. Mean tumour size was 3.1cm (range 0.8-10.5cm) and 47% of cases were stratified as intermediate/high risk using R.E.N.A.L nephrometry scoring. Forty-six patients had lesions in a hilar location, and 31% were anterior. Median blood loss was 30mls, with an open conversion rate of 1% and transfusion rate of 1.6%. Median warm ischaemic time (WIT) was 21min, positive surgical margins were found in 4% and our post-operative Clavien 3/ > complication rate was 2.6%. We had a 1-day median length of stay with a 30day readmission rate of 2%. Of 631 patients (80%) with a definitive histological diagnosis of cancer, 23% had T1b/ > disease. Over a mean 15month follow-up period (range 1-125months), 2% of patients developed recurrences and our cohort demonstrated a 99% 5year cancer specific survival. Trifecta was achieved in 67% of cases and pentafecta in 47%. Age (p = 0.05), operative time (p = 0.008), pT1b tumours (p = 0.03), R.E.N.A.L score and blood loss (p = 0.001) were found to statistically significantly influence achievement of trifecta. Pentafecta achievement was influenced by R.E.N.A.L score (p = 0.008), operative time (p = 0.001) and blood loss (p = 0.001). We demonstrate the retroperitoneal approach in RAPN is feasible and safe irrespective of lesion location and complexity. In the hands of high-volume centres that are skilled in the retroperitoneal approach the benefits of retroperitoneal surgery can be extended even to challenging cohorts of patients without compromising their oncological or functional outcomes.

Comparison of Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Partial Nephrectomy with Single-Port Robot.

Purpose: To investigate the efficacy and safety of single-port (SP) robotic transperitoneal (TP) and retroperitoneal (RP) partial nephrectomy. Materials and Methods: We sequentially analyzed 30 partial nephrectomy performed after the SP robot was introduced to the hospital in September 2021 to June 2022. All patients were found to have T1 renal cell carcinoma (RCCs) and were operated by a single expert in conventional robot with da Vinci SP platform. Results: Total of 30 patients underwent SP robotic partial nephrectomy with 16 (53.33%) by TP approach and 14 (47.67%) by RP. Body mass index was slightly higher in TP group (25.37 vs 23.53, p-value = 0.040). The other demographic information was not significantly different. There was no statistical difference in ischemic time (727.41 ± 561.18 seconds for TP and 698.56 ± 299.23 seconds for RP, p-value = 0.812), and console time (67.97 ± 24.06 minutes for TP and 69.71 ± 28.66 minutes for RP, p-value = 0.724). There was no statistical difference in perioperative and pathologic outcomes either. Postoperative renal function calculated from diethylenetriaminepentacetate was 103.33 mL/min/1.73 m2 for TP and 101.33 mL/min/1.73 m2 for RP (p-value = 0.214). And 90.36 mL/min/1.73 m2 for TP and 87.74 mL/min/1.73 m2 for RP at 90 days after surgery (p-value = 0.592). Conclusion: SP robot partial nephrectomy can be performed effectively and safely regardless of the approach. TP and RP approach offers similar perioperative and postoperative outcomes for T1 RCC. The Clinical Trial Registration number KC22WISI0431.

Early Postoperative Outcomes of Retroperitoneal Partial Nephrectomy of Anterior and Posterior Renal Tumors: A 5-Year Experience in A Single Center.

Objective: Partial nephrectomy (PN) is one of the surgical treatment options for renal tumors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of retroperitoneal PN for anterior and posterior tumors. Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 177 patients who had renal tumors that were detected on abdominal computed tomography and underwent PN between January 2017 and April 2021. Tumor position was defined by the anatomic avascular Brodel's line. Surgical outcomes were compared between approaches using the chi-squared Student's t-tests, logistic regression analysis, and stratification analysis. Results: Of the 177 patients, 97 (54.8%) patients had anterior renal tumors and 80 (45.2%) had posterior renal tumors. On comparing the surgical results between the two groups, the anterior group had higher levels of hemoglobin (Hb) reduction (-1.92 vs -1.54 g/dL, p = 0.0444), but the estimated blood loss showed no significant difference between the two groups (497.6 vs 433.2 mL, p = 0.4149). In addition, the alteration in estimated glomerular filtration rate at postoperative 1st day (p = 0.5616), 6th month (p = 0.5046), and at postoperative 1st year (p = 0.7085) was not significantly different between the two groups. Other surgical outcomes, such as blood transfusion rate, complications, and lengths of stay, also had no significant difference. Stratified analysis revealed the anterior renal tumors had a 3.76 times risk (p = 0.0186) than the posterior tumors for decreasing Hb >10% under laparoscopic PN. No postoperative gastrointestinal-related complications were reported. Conclusions: This study demonstrated retroperitoneal surgical access to renal tumors and revealed equivalent surgical outcomes for both anterior and posterior renal tumors. Moreover, anterior renal tumors had benefits under robotic PN for bleeding control. Retroperitoneal PN can be considered as a good approach for both anterior and posterior renal tumors with few intra-abdominal complications.

Early outcomes of robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy: evaluating surgical success with margin, ischemia, and complication score.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the minimum number of required cases for successful robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for an experienced surgeon in transperitoneal robotic surgery. Our prospectively collected clinic database was evaluated retrospectively, and 50 patients who underwent robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy by a single experienced surgeon from January 2019 to February 2023 were included in this study. Demographic and perioperative data and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores were noted. margin, ischemia, and complication score was used to predict surgical success. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine how many cases were required to achieve margin, ischemia, and complication score positivity and to apply the off-clamp technique. Also, the first 25 patients were assigned to Group 1 and the second 25 patients to Group 2, and the data were compared between the groups. The patients' demographic data and tumor characteristics were similar in the groups. The off-clamp technique and sutureless technique rates in Group 2 were significantly higher than that in Group 1. Margin, ischemia, and complication score positivity was observed in 60% (n=15) of Group 1 and 96% (n=24) of Group 2. At receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the 25th and later cases were statistically significant in terms of margin, ischemia, and complication score positivity. In terms of performing surgery with the off-clamp technique, the 28th and subsequent cases were statistically significant. A total of 25 or more cases appear to be sufficient to provide optimal surgical results in robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for an experienced surgeon.

Transperitoneal laparoscopic and robot-assisted resection of anterior and posterior kidney tumors

Background. Laparoscopic and robot-assisted resection of the posterior kidney tumors can be performed through retroperitoneal and transperitoneal accesses. Supporters of retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy point to better results for neoplasms in this location. However, most surgeons use transperitoneal access.Aim. To perform comparative analysis of the results of laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial resection of anterior and posterior renal neoplasms.Materials and methods. The results of transperitoneal minimally invasive partial nephrectomy in 156 patients (86 (55.1 %) men and 70 (44.9 %) women) were analyzed. Anterior tumors (1st group) were diagnosed in 96 (61.5 %), posterior (2nd group) in 60 (38.5 %) patients. In the 1st group, mean tumor size was 3.4 ± 1.6 cm; in the 2nd group, 3.2 ± 1.4 cm. In the 1st group, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was performed in 70 (72.9 %), robot-assisted in 26 (27.1 %) patients; in the 2nd group in 40 (66.7 %) and 20 (33.3 %) patients, respectively. Comparative analysis of operating time, warm ischemia time, complications and glomerular filtration rate was performed.Results. No conversions into nephrectomy or open interventions were performed. Time of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in the 1st group was shorter than in the 2nd: 108.6 min versus 120.5 min (р &gt;0.05). In robot-assisted partial nephrectomy it was 90.5 and 112.6 min (р &gt;0.05), respectively. For laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, mean warm ischemia time in the 1st group was 15.0 min, in the 2nd group it was 17.5 min (р &gt;0.05); in robot-assisted operation it was 13.2 and 16.0 min (р &gt;0.05), respectively. Blood loss volume was lower in the 1st group compared to the 2nd: 125 ml versus 230 ml (р &lt;0.05). In all patients, renal cell carcinoma was diagnosed; Т1а tumors were predominant (in the 1st and 2nd group, 87.5 and 88.3 %, respectively; р &gt;0.05). Postoperative complications in transperitoneal resection of anterior tumors were observed less frequently: 16.7 % versus 20.0 % (р &gt;0.05). Grade I complications per the Clavien classification in the 1st and 2nd group were observed in 8 (8.3 %) and 6 (10.0 %) patients, grade II in 6 (6.3 %) and 5 (8.3 %) patients, grade III in 2 (2.1 %) and 1 (1.7 %) patients. After resection, urinary leakage through the drain was observed in 2 (2.1 %) patients of the 1st group and 1 (1.7 %) patient of the 2nd group; they underwent drainage of the upper urinary tract using a stent. Blood transfusion in the postoperative period was performed in 2 patients from each group (2.1 and 3.3 %, respectively). In the 1st group, glomerular filtration rate before and after surgery was 68 and 56 ml/min/1.73 m2, in the 2nd group 70.2 and 58.2 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively; no significant difference was observed (р &gt;0.05).Conclusion. Transperitoneal access allows to safely perform minimally invasive resection of the anterior and posterior kidney tumors with results comparable to the perioperative results of retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy.

Novel Gerota-edge-sling technique facilitates retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a comparative study

BackgroundRetroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy is markedly restricted by limited space and visual field. We introduced a novel Gerota-edge-sling (GES) technique with self-designed traction devices to overcome these defects by attaching Gerota fascia to abdominal wall, and comparatively evaluated its utilization with routine technique.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed for consecutive patients who underwent routine (control group) or GES assisted (GES group) retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors in our hospital between March 2018 and June 2020. Clinical data of perioperative outcomes and complications were collected and compared. Comparison of outcomes between anterior versus posterior tumor subgroups was also conducted. Linear regression analysis was used to define the relationship between dissection time and perinephric fat status in each group.ResultsTotally 103 patients were included, 48 in control and 55 in GES group respectively. All the procedures were completed successfully without conversion or positive surgical margin. GES group had significantly decreased console time (91 ± 36 min vs. 117 ± 41 min, p < 0.01) and dissection time (67 ± 35 min vs. 93 ± 38 min, p < 0.01) than control, while ischemia time, blood loss, and nephrometry score comparable between them. No major postoperative complications occurred. Dissection time of GES group was notably shorter than that of control in both anterior/posterior subgroups. Only in control group, dissection time was positively associated with perinephric fat status.ConclusionsThe GES technique acting as an adjunct to robotic arms with space-sparing feature, notably improves surgical exposure and facilitates dissection in retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy, while having great feasibility, efficacy and safety.

The application of internal traction technique in retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal ventral tumors

BackgroundFor patients with prior intra-abdominal surgery or multiple arteries, the retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (rRAPN) is a better choice. The renal ventral tumor poses an additional challenge due to poor tumor exposure. This study is determined to assess the feasibility of an internal traction technique (ITT) in rRAPN for the management of renal ventral tumors.MethodsFrom November 2019 to March 2021, a total of 28 patients with renal ventral tumor underwent rRAPN. All patients had prior abdominal surgery or multiple arteries. The ITT group (20 patients), which improved the tumor exposure by traction of the kidney with suture, was compared with the traditional technique group (8 patients) in terms of warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss and postoperative hospital stay, retroperitoneal drainage, R.E.N.A.L. score, and serum creatinine. Differences were considered significant when P < 0.05.ResultsAll rRAPN surgeries were successful without conversion to radical nephrectomy or open partial nephrectomy. The warm ischemia time was lower in the ITT group (17.10 min vs. 24.63 min; P < 0.05). Estimated blood loss in the traditional technique group was 324.88 ± 79.42 mL, and in the ITT group, it was 117.45±35.25 mL (P < 0.05). No significant differences with regard to postoperative hospital stay, retroperitoneal drainage, R.E.N.A.L. score, and serum creatinine were observed between both groups. Surgical margins were negative and no intraoperative complications occurred in all the patients. After 10 months of follow-up, no recurrence or metastasis occurred in all cases.ConclusionITT is a feasible, safe, and valid procedure in rRAPN for renal ventral tumors. Application of ITT improved the exposure and reduces warm ischemic time in comparison with the conventional procedure.

MP004 - Is the intraoperative ultrasonography really necessary during laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for exophytic kidney tumors?: A matched-pair analysis.

MP004 - Is the intraoperative ultrasonography really necessary during laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for exophytic kidney tumors?: A matched-pair analysis.

VJY03 - Robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for a horseshoe kidney

VJY03 - Robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for a horseshoe kidney

Predictors of surgical outcomes of retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

To evaluate surgical outcomes in a series of laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomies. A total of 147 patients who underwent laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy by a single surgeon were evaluated. Pre-operative parameters (body mass index, ASA score, tumour size, cTNM stage, PADUA score risk, surgeon experience) and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes (operative mean time, warm ischemia time, blood loss, transfusion rate, length of hospitalization, and margin-ischaemiacomplications [MIC] success rate) were considered. For 134 patients (91.1%) the success of the treatment, defined by a MIC = 3, was obtained. When the statistical significance of each of the independent variables was tested, surgeon's experience added statistical significance to the prediction of operative time (p = 0.000), warm ischemia time (p = 0.000) and blood loss (p = 0.000); tumour size (p = 0.046) to the prediction MIC (p = 0.010), operative time (p = 0.000), warm ischemia time (p = 0.003) and blood loss (p = 0.010); ASA score to the length of hospitalization (p = 0.009). Laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy represents an adequate and safe technique for the treatment of T1 renal cancer. Optimal MIC success rate can be achieved, although intraoperative outcomes tend to be related to the learning curve even in a very experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Length of hospitalization depends on general health condition of patients.

Retroperitoneoscopic approach for highly complex posterior renal hilar tumors

ABSTRACTObjectives:To show our single-center experience in retroperitoneoscopic approach for highly complex posterior hilar tumors. Minimally invasive nephron sparing surgery for renal hilar tumors is extremely challenging due to their anatomic location, close to the main renal vessels and the collecting system (1). Transperitoneal approach is feasible, but highly complex because the anterior disposition of the vasculature. Retroperitoneal approach can easily provide access to the posterior hilar structures and the posterolateral surface of the kidney(2, 3).Materials and Methods:We retrospectively reviewed our hilar renal tumor database and analyzed those in which a retroperitoneoscopic approach was chosen. The RENAL score was then calculated, and operative and ischemia times were recorded. We also collected the mean hospital stay and the presence of complications. Pathology reports and follow-up were also gathered.Results:Five of our twelve highly complex hilar renal tumor patients were treated using a retroperitoneoscopic approach. Mean RENAL score was 10. Mean operative time was 135 minutes. Mean warm ischemia time was 14 minutes. Mean hospital stay was 4 days. We have recorded 2 complications. One patient required a transfusion and another presented with an urinary fistula which was treated by double J stent placement. The pathology report showed a clear cell renal cell carcinoma pT1a in most of the cases. Only one patient had a positive margin. To date, no recurrences have been noticed.Conclusions:The treatment of complex renal hilar tumors in a minimally invasive fashion is highly challenging even in experienced hands. Retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy is feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of such lesions. Long-term oncologic outcomes of this approach are awaited.

V02-10 INITIAL EXPERIENCE WITH SINGLE-PORT ROBOTIC RETROPERITONEAL PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY USING A PURPOSE-BUILT SINGLE-PORT SURGICAL SYSTEM: TECHNICAL DETAILS

You have accessJournal of UrologySingle Port Surgery, Novel Techniques & MIS Training (V02)1 Apr 2020V02-10 INITIAL EXPERIENCE WITH SINGLE-PORT ROBOTIC RETROPERITONEAL PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY USING A PURPOSE-BUILT SINGLE-PORT SURGICAL SYSTEM: TECHNICAL DETAILS Guilherme Sawczyn*, Soodong Kim, Alireza Aminsharifi, Clark A. Wilson, Juan Garisto, and Jihad Kaouk Guilherme Sawczyn*Guilherme Sawczyn* More articles by this author , Soodong KimSoodong Kim More articles by this author , Alireza AminsharifiAlireza Aminsharifi More articles by this author , Clark A. WilsonClark A. Wilson More articles by this author , Juan GaristoJuan Garisto More articles by this author , and Jihad KaoukJihad Kaouk More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000837.010AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: To present the feasibility and technical details of robot-assisted single port partial nephrectomy with a retroperitoneal approach, using da Vinci SP® platform. METHODS: Between April and July 2019, 2 patients (1 male) with renal mass (both right side) underwent robot-assisted single port retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy. Both patients had organ confined disease with lower pole 24 and 25 mm renal masses (Nephrometry score: 4p and 6p). Patients were positioned in 90 degree flank position and a 30 mm transverse incision was made between the 12th rib and the iliac crest at the level of the mid axillary line. The retroperitoneal space is initially identified and created by digital exploration, followed by balloon dilation to create an appropriate working space. The inner ring of the alexis wound retractor was inserted in the retroperitoneal space, and the GelPOINT Mini advanced access platform (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA) was assembled. A 25 mm multichannel robot port and a 12-mm accessory laparoscopic port were passed through the GelPOINT and the da Vinci SP® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) was docked. Standard partial nephrectomy with early unclamping technique and renorrhaphy in two layers was performed. The specimen was extracted through the trocar site and no drain was placed. RESULTS: Patients’ age was 58 and 78 years. Both cases were completed successfully without any need for conversion, blood transfusion or intraoperative complications. Operative times were 155 and 240 minutes, with warm ischemia times of 26 and 29 minutes. Postoperative course was uneventful and patients were discharged after 26 and 42 hours of hospital stay. In-hospital analgesia included exclusively nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Histopathological examination of specimens showed a 21 mm clear cell renal cell carcinoma and a 26 mm benign papillary adenoma, both with negative margins. CONCLUSIONS: Single-port partial nephrectomy through retroperitoneal approach is feasible in selected patients by Using da Vinci SP® platform is feasible. This system has features such as double-jointed articulating robotic instruments and the articulating camera that allow to optimize the work in a smaller environment such the retroperitoneal space. With avoiding violation of the peritoneum, promising results regarding pain control, the need for opioid usage and postoperative recovery can be expected. Further comparative studies with larger sample and long-term follow-up data are recommended to corroborate these initial findings. Source of Funding: none © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e183-e183 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Guilherme Sawczyn* More articles by this author Soodong Kim More articles by this author Alireza Aminsharifi More articles by this author Clark A. Wilson More articles by this author Juan Garisto More articles by this author Jihad Kaouk More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Comparison of retroperitoneal and transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy by pentafecta perioperative and renal functional outcomes.

602 Background: To compare and analyze surgical, oncological and functional outcomes of transperitoneal (TRPN) and retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (RRPN). Methods: Out of 566 consecutive patients who underwent RAPN by a single surgeon from December 2008 to July 2017, this study included 523 patients (TRPN 310, RRPN 213) who evaluated preoperative and 1-year postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Our primary endpoint was to compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of both approaches by the measure of Pentafecta (negative surgical margin, no 30-day complication, warm ischemic time (WIT) ≤25 minutes, return of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to &gt; 90% from baseline and no upstaging of chronic kidney disease). Secondary endpoint was to find the factors associated with Pentafecta by multivariate regression analysis. Results: No significant difference was found in terms of age, BMI, laterality, history of hypertension or diabetes, ASA grade, tumor size and RENAL nephrometry score. These outcomes were lower in the RRPN group: operative time [median (IQR) 244 (202-295) vs. 273 (230-314); p &lt; 0.001], WIT [median (IQR) 19 (15-25) vs. 21 (16-27); p &lt; 0.008] and estimated blood loss (EBL) [median (IQR) 100 (60-200) vs. 150 (100-200); p &lt; 0.003]. Hospital stay, baseline eGFR, 1-year postoperative eGFR, the rate of Pentafecta achievement, recurrence and complications were not different. The rate of WIT ≤ 25 minutes was solely significantly different (TRPN 69.7% vs. RRPN 77.9%, p = 0.045) in the Pentafecta criteria. Multivariate analysis revealed tumor size [OR (95% CI) 0.641 (0.536-0.767), p &lt; 0.001) and hospital stays (OR 0.639, p &lt; 0.001) as predictive for lack of Pentafecta. Conclusions: RRPN demonstrated less operative time, WIT and EBL than TPRN. Pentafecta achievements were equivalent in both approaches. Tumor size and hospital stays were found as predictive factors of Pentafecta.