Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy Group Research Articles

Comparisons of the Safety and Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted vs Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for Central Renal Angiomyolipomas: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Study.

Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) vs laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in the treatment of central renal angiomyolipomas (AMLs). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 103 patients who were treated with either RAPN or LPN for central AMLs between January 2017 and June 2022. Propensity scores were matched according to sex, age, laterality, body mass index, symptoms, diameter of tumor, location of tumor distribution, R.E.N.A.L score, preoperative hemoglobin, preoperative serum creatinine, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, chronic disease, previous abdominal surgery, preoperative selective arterial embolization, American Society of Anesthesiologists scale, and duration of follow-up, and after matching, perioperative and prognostic data of the two groups were compared. Results: A total of 57 patients underwent RAPN, and 46 patients underwent LPN. Before matching, there were more complex AMLs in the RAPN group, and R.E.N.A.L scores differed between the two groups (10 vs 9, p < 0.001). After matching, the median warm ischemic time in the RAPN group was significantly shorter than that in the LPN group (21.5 minutes vs 28 minutes, p = 0.034), as well as the median time of postoperative mobilization (1 day vs 2 days, p < 0.001). The other indicators were not significantly different between the groups. Conclusions: For central AMLs, both RAPN and LPN were safe and feasible surgical treatments, but RAPN might be associated with shorter warm ischemia time and earlier postoperative mobilization.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes between Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy and Cryoablation in Elderly Patients with Renal Cancer

Advances in imaging technologies have increased the opportunities for treating small-diameter renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) in the elderly. This retrospective study based on real-world clinical practice compared perioperative complications, preoperative and postoperative renal function, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival in elderly patients with RCC who had undergone robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) or percutaneous cryoablation (PCA). A total of 99 patients (aged ≥70 years), including 50 and 49 patients in the RAPN and PCA groups, respectively, were analyzed. In the entire cohort, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications occurred in only one patient who had undergone RAPN. Renal function was significantly lower in the postoperative period than in the preoperative period in both the RAPN and PCA groups. The recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates were worse in the PCA group than in the RAPN group, albeit not significantly. RAPN was considered a safe and effective method for treating RCCs in elderly patients. Moreover, although the recurrence rate was slightly higher in the PCA group than in the RAPN group, PCA was deemed to be a safe alternative, especially for treating patients in whom general anesthesia poses a high risk.

Clinical Benefits of Indocyanine Green Fluorescence in Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy.

Simple SummaryIndocyanine green (ICG) administration in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) can minimize warm ischemia time and preserve more parenchyma resulting in exceptional preservation of renal function and reduced incidence of postoperative complications. However, previous studies have seldom compared how ICG-RAPN use differs when used to treat benign versus malignant renal tumors because the baseline patient and tumor characteristics as well as treatment goals are completely different. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and the differences in the results of ICG administration between patients with benign and malignant tumors. We have demonstrated that ICG-RAPN yielded superior preservation of short-term renal function. Of the patients with malignant renal tumors, it had less operative blood loss without a more positive margin rate than standard RAPN.Background: To compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of indocyanine green (ICG) administration in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and report the differences in the results between patients with benign and malignant renal tumors. Methods: From 2017 to 2020, 132 patients underwent RAPN at our institution, including 21 patients with ICG administration. Clinical data obtained from our institution’s RAPN database were retrospectively reviewed. Intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and functional outcomes of RAPN were assessed. Results: The pathological results indicated that among the 127 patients, 38 and 89 had received diagnoses of benign and malignant tumors, respectively. A longer operative time (311 vs. 271 min; p = 0.006) but superior preservation of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 3-month follow-up (90% vs. 85%; p = 0.031) were observed in the ICG-RAPN group. Less estimated blood loss, shorter warm ischemia time, and superior preservation of eGFR at postoperative day 1 and 6-month follow-up were also noted, despite no significant differences. Among the patients with malignant tumors, less estimated blood loss (30 vs. 100 mL; p < 0.001) was reported in the ICG-RAPN subgroup. Conclusions: Patients with ICG-RAPN exhibited superior short-term renal function outcomes compared with the standard RAPN group. Of the patients with malignant tumors, ICG-RAPN was associated with less blood loss than standard RAPN without a more positive margin rate. Further studies with larger cohorts and prospective designs are necessary to verify the intraoperative and functional advantages of the green dye.

Prediction of significant renal function decline after open, laparoscopic, and robotic partial nephrectomy: External validation of the Martini's nomogram on the RECORD2 project cohort.

Martini etal. developed a nomogram to predict significant (>25%) renal function loss after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and identified four risk categories. We aimed to externally validate Martini's nomogram on a large, national, multi-institutional data set including open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Data of 2584 patients treated with partial nephrectomy for renal masses at 26 urological Italian centers (RECORD2 project) were collected. Renal function was assessed at baseline, on third postoperative day, and then at 6, 12, 24, and 48 months postoperatively. Multivariable models accounting for variables included in the Martini's nomogram were applied to each approach predicting renal function loss at all the specific timeframes. Multivariable models showed high area under the curve for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy at 6- and 12-month (87.3% and 83.6%) and for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (83.2% and 75.4%), whereas area under the curves were lower in open partial nephrectomy (78.4% and 75.2%). The predictive ability of the model decreased in all the surgical approaches at 48 months from surgery. Each Martini risk group showed an increasing percentage of patients developing a significant renal function reduction in the open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy group, as well as an increased probability to develop a significant estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction in the considered time cutoffs, although the predictive ability of the classes was <70% at 48 months of follow-up. Martini's nomogram is a valid tool for predicting the decline in renal function at 6 and 12 months after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, whereas it showed a lower performance at longer follow-up and in patients treated with open approach at all these time cutoffs.

Perioperative and long-term functional outcomes of robot-assisted versus open partial nephrectomy: A single-center retrospective study of a Japanese cohort

ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term functional outcomes between robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in Japanese patients. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 242 patients who underwent either RAPN or OPN between 2007 and 2017 at our hospital. Propensity score matching was carried out between the two groups at a ratio of 1:1. Perioperative outcomes and postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) were compared at one and three years of follow-up. ResultsAfter propensity score matching, we evaluated 39 patients from each group. The ischemia duration of the RAPN group was significantly shorter than that of the OPN group (18 vs. 24, p < 0.001). Moreover, the estimated blood loss (EBL) was significantly lower in the RAPN group than in the OPN group (50 vs. 174, p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the postoperative eGFR between the two groups at one or three years of follow-up (OPN 54.8 vs. RAPN 61.2, p = 0.109, and OPN 54.8 vs. RAPN 55.5, p = 0.262, respectively). ConclusionRAPN resulted in shorter ischemia durations and lower rates of EBL than did OPN; however, no differences in long-term renal function were observed between RAPN and OPN in our propensity-score matched Japanese cohort.

Renal Functional and Perioperative Outcomes of Retroperitoneal Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy with Segmental Renal Artery Clamping.

Background: Retroperitoneal approach and segmental renal artery clamping in partial nephrectomy are techniques that facilitate postoperative recovery and renal function preservation. This study aimed to compare the renal function preservation and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) with these techniques. Materials and Methods: Clinical parameters of 43 patients who had undergone retroperitoneal RAPN from March 2017 to December 2019 were retrospectively collected and compared with those of 52 patients who had undergone retroperitoneal LPN at the same period in our institution. Differences in operating time, warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, complications, postoperative hospital stay, as well as renal function loss were compared between the two groups. Results: Background characteristics between RAPN and LPN groups such as age, gender, BMI, and tumor characteristics were comparable. All RAPNs and LPNs were successfully completed without conversion to open surgery or nephrectomy. No significant difference in operating time, estimated blood loss, complications, and postoperative hospital stay was observed between RAPN and LPN groups. The warm ischemia time in RAPN group was slightly shorter than that of LPN groups (P = .054). Compared with the LPN group, the RAPN group was significantly associated with less glomerular filtration rate reduction and renal volume loss rate (P = .042 and P = .013, respectively). Conclusions: The perioperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups. However, compared with LPN, RAPN had superiority in preserving renal function in our series.

Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for Giant Sporadic Renal Angiomyolipomas of ≥7 cm: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Background To compare the perioperative and functional outcomes between robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for giant sporadic renal angiomyolipomas (AMLs) of ≥7 cm. Materials and Methods Patients with sporadic renal AMLs of ≥7 cm who underwent RAPN or LPN in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between 2015 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score matching (1 : 1) was performed to adjust for potential baseline confounders. Perioperative and functional outcomes of the RAPN and LPN groups were collected and compared. Result After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics were found between the groups (41 vs. 41). Within the matched cohort, the warm ischemia time (WIT) in the RAPN group was significantly shorter than that in the LPN group (21 vs. 27 min, p < 0.001). In addition, the RAPN group was associated with improved postoperative renal function (72.8 vs. 69.8 mL/min/1.73 m2, p=0.045). WIT and preoperative renal function are independent predictors of renal function at 6 months postoperatively, and renal score and operation method are independent predictors of WIT. Conclusion RAPN and LPN are safe and feasible minimally invasive treatments for sporadic giant renal AMLs, but RAPN is associated with shorter WIT and better postoperative renal functional preservation. WIT and preoperative renal function are independent predictors of renal function at 6 months postoperatively, while the RENAL score and surgical method are independent risk factors to WIT. For giant and complex renal AMLs, RAPN is the first choice when condition permits.

Optimal Surgical Outcome of Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy (MIPN) Based on an Early Postoperative Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR).

To compare laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) performed in two European tertiary centers using the classic optimal surgical definition - "MIC" - and a new optimal surgical definition: the "Novel TRIFECTA" (NT) concept. We sought to strengthen the PN evidence and to test the NT's performance. The study population comprehended 505 cases of localized kidney cancer from two tertiary centers between 2012 and 2019. The NT achievement was higher in the RAPN group when compared to LPN (70.5 vs. 87.4%; p = 0.004), while no differences were found when considering the MIC criteria. Also, a similar high-grade complications rate (Clavien-Dindo > III) and operative time (105 min vs. 100 min; p = NS) were found. In the multivariable regression, the RAPN approach was a predictor of NT achievement (OR 2.45; p = 0.008). NT achievement was higher in the RAPN group, while similar results were found when evaluating the MIC criteria. The NT definition could be more sensitive to the individual-specific responses related to the PN.

Varying Outcomes among Patients with Large Angiomyolipomas according to the Treatment Method

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of large angiomyolipoma (AML) treatment by selective arterial embolization (SAE) versus nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) using a robotic surgical system. Materials and Methods: Between January 2011 and June 2018, we retrospectively reviewed 25 patients who underwent robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) or SAE for large AMLs. Ten patients underwent RAPN, and 15 underwent SAE. Patient demographics, AML characteristics, and operative and postoperative clinical outcomes were recorded and analyzed. Outcomes were compared between patients who underwent RAPN and patients who underwent SAE. Specifically, changes in renal function and size were evaluated after the treatment. Results: The mean age of the patients was 52.9 years, and 22 of 25 patients were female. The mean maximum AML diameter on computed tomography was 8.9 cm, and 8 patients had multiple masses. Twenty-two of 25 patients had moderate to high RENAL complexity. Patients who underwent SAE had more symptoms (p = 0.018) and higher RENAL complexity scores (p = 0.013) on average. On average, tumor size decreased by 99% among RAPN patients and by 58% among SAE patients (p = 0.001). Although the mean pretreatment estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was higher among RAPN patients (99.8 vs. 80.0 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.043), there were no significant changes in eGFR in either group after the treatment. One patient in the RAPN group experienced complications, but the postoperative ileus resolved without intervention. Conclusions: Both RAPN and SAE were effective and feasible treatment options for large AMLs. The AML characteristics and the condition of the patient might be important in determining the appropriate treatment method.

Trifecta outcomes of modified robot-assisted simple enucleation and standard robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for treating clinical T1b renal cell carcinoma.

BackgroundTo compare perioperative outcomes and Trifecta achievement of modified robot-assisted simple enucleation (MRASE) with robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for treating clinical T1b renal tumors.MethodsWe analyzed 203 patients who underwent MRASE or RAPN for clinical T1b renal tumors at our institution from September 2014 to June 2018. The two groups were compared regarding perioperative outcome variables. Trifecta was defined as no perioperative complications, negative surgical margin, and ischemia time ≤25 minutes.ResultsIn all, 139 patients underwent MRASE and 64 underwent RAPN respectively. Patients in the MRASE group had shorter operative time (197.7 vs. 215.6 min, P=0.039) and warm ischemic time (21.2 vs. 24.1 min, P=0.004) in comparison to the RAPN group. The groups were comparable in estimated blood loss (230.5 vs. 269.8 mL, P=0.259). Tumor bed suturing was performed with a significantly lower frequency in the MRASE group than in the RAPN group (11.5% vs. 90.6%, P<0.01). The incidence of perioperative complications was similar. The rate of positive surgical margins was similar in both groups (2.2% vs. 6.3%, P=0.284). Trifecta was achieved in 61.2% and 42.2% of MRASE and RAPN patients (P=0.012). On multivariable analysis, the type of procedure, RENAL score, estimated blood loss, and operative time were positive factors for the achievement of Trifecta.ConclusionsIn this series MRASE was superior to RAPN with regard to the achievement of Trifecta in treating T1b renal tumors. Besides, MRASE had better outcomes for shorter operative time, shorter warm ischemic time, and less need for tumor bed suturing as compared with RAPN.

Therapeutic and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy Versus Cryoablation for T1 Renal Cell Carcinoma.

In cT1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC), very few studies have compared oncological outcomes and renal function preservation rates in nephron-sparing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and percutaneous cryoablation (PCA). We retrospectively analysed 126 patients with cT1 RCC treated with RAPN (n=78) and computed tomography-guided PCA (n=48) between March 2016 and November 2019. Clinical data and outcomes were compared for the two groups. There were no significant differences in the 3-year overall survival and relapse-free survival rates in the two groups (p=0.17 and p=0.093, respectively). The median percentage of estimated glomerular filtration rate preservation at 6 months after surgery was 91.8% and 91.4% in the RAPN and PCA groups, respectively (p=0.9). In patients with cT1a RCC, oncological outcomes and renal function appear similar following RAPN and PCA.

Comparison of Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Hilar Tumors: Results from a Tertiary Referral Center

Objective: To compare perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes between robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for renal hilar tumors. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for renal hilar tumors at our institution between January 2014 and August 2018. The entire cohort was divided into two groups according to surgical approach: RAPN and LPN group. Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes of the two groups were collected and compared. Results: A total of 116 patients with renal hilar tumors were identified, including 52 patients who underwent RAPN and 64 patients who underwent LPN, respectively. Demographic baseline characteristics were similar in two groups. There were no differences between the RAPN and LPN groups for operative time, transfusion rate, conversion rate, surgical margin, perioperative complication, and hospital stay. Compared with the LPN group, the RAPN group was associated with significant less estimated blood loss (100 vs 150 mL; p < 0.001), shorter warm ischemia time (20.3 vs 24.5 minutes; p = 0.001), and higher direct cost (p < 0.001). Percentage of estimated glomerular filtration rate change at 6 months after surgery was lower in RAPN group than LPN group (10.4% vs 15.2%; p = 0.020). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of oncologic outcomes. Conclusions: For hilar tumors, both RAPN and LPN were safe and feasible surgical treatments. RAPN might be associated with superior perioperative outcomes (less estimated blood loss and shorter warm ischemia time) and better postoperative renal functional preservation. RAPN might be the preferred option when condition permits for renal hilar tumors.

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy Vs Conventional Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Functional and Surgical Outcomes of a Prospective Single Surgeon Randomized Study.

Background: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) are commonly used techniques for treating small renal masses. Regarding renal function (RF) preservation, no superiority of one technique over the other has yet been definitely demonstrated. Objective: To compare functional and surgical outcomes of LPN and RAPN. Patients and Methods: Between 2015 and 2019, we prospectively randomized 115 patients with cT1-T2 renal masses to LPN in total ischemia or RAPN in selective ischemia. Primary endpoint was RF preservation, assessed by renal scintigraphy (RS). RS assessments were performed preoperatively and at 6 months follow-up. Secondary endpoints included clinical, histopathologic, and surgical outcomes. Results: One hundred eight patients were included in the final analysis. Patient and tumor characteristics were comparable. No significant difference in RS values after 6 months was observed between both groups. Median (interquartile range) RF change after 6 months was -18.0% (-26.5 to -11.0) in LPN group and -20.0 (-33.2 to -12.0) in RAPN group (p = 0.3). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) warm ischemia time was 21.1 (6.1) minutes in LPN group and 19.6 (7.7) minutes in RAPN group (p = 0.2). No positive surgical margins (PSMs) occurred in the LPN group, whereas RAPN group had PSM in 4.9% (n = 3); p = 0.099. Renal volume loss after 6 months was 27.5% (22.7-45.7) in the LPN group vs 37.5 (13.7-54.2) in the RAPN group (p = 0.5). Mean operative times were lower in the LPN group (192.3 minutes [SD 44.5] vs 230.2 minutes [SD 59.6], p = 0.001). More complications occurred in the LPN group (31% vs 21%, p = 0.075). Transfusion rates were 15% for LPN and 11% for RAPN. Conclusions: In terms of preserving RF, LPN in total ischemia and RAPN in selective ischemia are comparable. In most patients, RF decrease of the affected kidney after PN seems to not exceed 25%, regardless of the surgical approach.

Lower Incidence of Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury in Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy Than in Open Partial Nephrectomy: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) after partial nephrectomy is attributed to parenchymal reduction and ischemia, but the extent of its effect remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative AKI among surgical modalities, robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and open partial nephrectomy (OPN), and to evaluate the validity of RAPN by comparing it with LPN and OPN in terms of postoperative AKI, perioperative complications, and long-term renal function. Patients and Methods: Patients who underwent RAPN, LPN, and OPN for renal tumors at our institutions between 2004 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. RAPN and LPN were performed under warm ischemia and OPN under cold ischemia. En bloc hilar clamping was employed for LPN and OPN and arterial clamping for RAPN. AKI was defined as % decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >25% from preoperative eGFR to postoperative nadir eGFR. Multivariate regression analysis was used to test associations of AKI with perioperative factors. Then, we compared the incidence of AKI with two propensity score-matched cohorts: RAPN vs OPN and RAPN vs LPN. Results: This study included 1762 cases (RAPN: 959, LPN: 215, and OPN: 588). After matching, 147 cases each from RAPN and LPN groups and 368 cases each from RAPN and OPN groups were selected. RAPN had shorter warm ischemia time than LPN, lower incidence of AKI, and lower % decrease in eGFR after 6 months. RAPN had a shorter ischemia time and a lower incidence of AKI than OPN, although the % decrease in eGFR after 6 months did not differ significantly. Conclusions: AKI incidence was lower in RAPN than in LPN or OPN, which may be due to the shorter ischemia time or clamping of only arteries in RAPN. Although long-term renal outcomes did not differ between RAPN and OPN, RAPN can help prevent AKI. This supports the validity of RAPN for patients with chronic kidney disease.

PD11-04 COMPARING ENDOSCOPIC ROBOT-ASSISTED SIMPLE ENUCLEATION AND STANDARD ROBOT-ASSISTED PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR T1 RENAL CELL CARCINOMA: INITIAL RESULTS OF A NON-INFERIORITY RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Localized: Surgical Therapy II (PD11)1 Apr 2020PD11-04 COMPARING ENDOSCOPIC ROBOT-ASSISTED SIMPLE ENUCLEATION AND STANDARD ROBOT-ASSISTED PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR T1 RENAL CELL CARCINOMA: INITIAL RESULTS OF A NON-INFERIORITY RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL Qun Lu*, Xiaozhi Zhao, Changwei Ji, Guangxiang Liu, Linfeng Xu, and Hongqian Guo Qun Lu*Qun Lu* More articles by this author , Xiaozhi ZhaoXiaozhi Zhao More articles by this author , Changwei JiChangwei Ji More articles by this author , Guangxiang LiuGuangxiang Liu More articles by this author , Linfeng XuLinfeng Xu More articles by this author , and Hongqian GuoHongqian Guo More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000845.04AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Nephron-sparing surgery is the gold standard treatment for localized renal masses. Although published studies have showed excellent long-term oncologic results of simple enucleation (SE), many urologists still consider SE an unsafe technique with a high risk of incomplete tumor excision. This is a non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial to compare the peri-operative, renal functional and oncologic outcomes of endoscopic robot-assisted simple enucleation (ERASE) and standard robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in the treatment of T1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed sporadic, unilateral, T1 presumed RCC were recruited for this clinical trial from October 2018. This trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03624673). The protocol had been approved by the ethics committee of Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital. The inclusion criteria were clinical T1 RCC, age 18 to 80 years, normal contralateral renal function, RENAL score <=9 and willingness to participate in this study. The exclusion criteria were intolerance of robotic surgery, metastastic renal cell carcinoma, entry into collection system or hematuria and a history of other renal diseases. The primary outcome measure was rate of positive surgical margin (PSM). The Surface–Intermediate–Base margin score was reported for each tumor specimen. On the basis of the assumption of no difference in PSM rate between two techniques, we calculated that 190 participants per group were needed. RESULTS: The trial had presently enrolled 180 patients, of whom 90 were randomized to the ERASE group and 90 to the RAPN group. Demographic characteristics were similar. Mean operative time was 162.0 and 169.9 min, respectively (p=0.297). Warm ischemic time was comparable in the ERASE and RAPN group (18.7 vs 21.3 min; p=0.056). The estimated blood loss was similar (p=0.129). Tumor bed suturing was performed in 8.9% and 83.3% of ERASE and RAPN cases (P=0.000). No hilar clamping was performed in 8 (8.9%) ERASE patients and 5 (5.6%) RAPN patients (p=0.388). The rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications were similar. The incidence of PSMs was comparable between the ERASE and RAPN groups (2.2% and 3.3%, p= 1.000). No recurrence was found in the two groups during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The initial results of this trial reveal that ERASE is an oncologically safe and effective alternative to RAPN for T1 renal cell carcinoma. ERASE confers comparable peri-operative and oncologic results with RAPN, with similar incidence of PSM. The final results of this trial are required to validate our findings. Source of Funding: None © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e254-e254 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Qun Lu* More articles by this author Xiaozhi Zhao More articles by this author Changwei Ji More articles by this author Guangxiang Liu More articles by this author Linfeng Xu More articles by this author Hongqian Guo More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7: A propensity score-based analysis.

ObjectivesTo present the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with RENAL nephrometry scores ≥7.Patients and methodsOne hundred and seventy patients, during the study period, were retrospectively reviewed in our analysis according to inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) method was applied to impose restrictions on the potential baseline confounders. The comparisons of perioperative and functional outcomes between the RPN and LPN groups were conducted and analyzed after PSM, Kaplan‐Meier analyses were performed to assess the differences about oncological outcomes between the two groups before and after PSM.ResultsOne hundred and nine and 61 T1b renal tumors with RENAL scores ≥7 were identified in the LPN and RPN groups, respectively. All significant differences in baseline characteristics disappeared after PSM. Except for 3 patients missing an appropriate pair, all the patients in the RPN group were successfully matched to 58 patients in the LPN group in a 1:1 ratio. Within the matched cohort, the RPN group was related to a significantly shorter mean operating time (OT) (P = .040), shorter mean warm ischemia time (WIT) (P = .023), and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (P = .023). The possibilities of surgical conversion, postoperative complication, and positive surgical margin were similar in the LPN and RPN groups. And there was also no significant difference in the pathological, renal functional, and oncological outcomes between the two series.ConclusionsFor patients with anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7, RPN had an advantage over LPN in reducing OT, WIT, and postoperative hospital stay length without increasing the risk of complications and weakening the oncological control, while the two surgical methods were similar in renal functional preservation.

Early Single-Center Experience with Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Using the da Vinci Xi: Comparative Assessment with Conventional Open Partial Nephrectomy

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate our experience with robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in comparison with conventional open partial nephrectomy (OPN). Patients and Methods: This study included 37 and 50 patients undergoing OPN and RAPN for small renal masses, respectively. A single surgeon performed RAPN for all 50 cases using the da Vinci Xi. Trifecta was defined as satisfying all of the following 3 criteria: ischemic time of ≤ 25 minutes, negative surgical margin and no major postoperative complications. Results: After adjusting patient variables by 1:1 propensity-score matching, 37 patients were included in each group, and no significant differences in major clinicopathological characteristics were noted between these 2 groups. RAPN was significantly superior to OPN with respect to operative time, estimated blood loss and postoperative length of hospital stay. The rate of trifecta achievement was significantly higher in the RAPN group than in the OPN group (91.9 vs. 62.2%). Furthermore, the operative procedure and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score were found to be independently associated with trifecta outcome by multivariate analysis of the entire cohort. Conclusions: Although this is our early experience with 50 initial cases, RAPN using the da Vinci Xi resulted in more favorable perioperative outcomes than OPN.

Predictors of renal function after open and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: A propensity score-matched study.

To investigate parameters predicting short- and long-term renal function after open partial nephrectomy and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Medical records of 896 patients who underwent open partial nephrectomy or robot-assisted partial nephrectomy from 2004 to 2017 at a single large-volume institution were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching of open partial nephrectomy and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy group was carried out with a ratio of 1:1. Postoperative outcomes were compared, and multivariate logistic regression was carried out to identify the parameters influencing acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease progression. No significant differences in preoperative characteristics were observed between the two study groups after matching. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy was significantly associated with a longer warm ischemic time (P<0.001) yet, estimated blood loss, positive surgical margin, rates of major postoperative complications and chronic kidney disease progression were significantly lower in the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy group (P<0.001, 0.033, <0.001, <0.001, and 0.005, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed robot-assisted partial nephrectomy was more favorable than open partial nephrectomy in terms of preserving renal function. Patients with a higher baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate were significantly associated with a greater risk of acute kidney injury (odds ratio 1.036; 95% confidence interval 1.021-1.052; P<0.001), but a decreased risk of chronic kidney disease progression (odds ratio 0.975; 95% confidence interval 0.955-0.994; P=0.011). Other independent predictors of chronic kidney disease progression were warm ischemic time (P=0.025), age (P=0.035), body mass index (P=0.041) and diabetes mellitus (P=0.035). Baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, warm ischemic time and surgery type are independent predictors of both acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease progression. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy is more favorable than open partial nephrectomy for reducing estimated blood loss, positive surgical margin, major postoperative complications and renal function preservation.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for totally intrarenal tumors: a single surgeon’s experience

Objective To investigate the safety and efficiency of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for totally intrarenal tumors (TITs). Methods Thirty-eight patients who underwent RAPN for treating TITs by one experienced surgeon were included between August 2012 and December 2017. There were 25 males and 13 females, aged 26-72 years(mean 51.6 years). Tumors of 24 cases were in right kidney, and 14 cases in left kidney. The diameter of tumor was(3.12±0.92)cm, the R. E.N.A.L. score was(9.76±1.00), and the Scr was(74.82±20.32)μmol/L. Patients’ peri-operative and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Results All the tumors were successfully resected without conversion to open surgery or radical nephrectomy. Mean operative time and ischemia time were (188.47±46.75) min and (24.32±7.69) min. Mean blood loss was (115.79±43.66) ml. One-week postoperative Scr was (85.97±28.33) μmol/L. Postoperative hemorrhage was successfully treated by DSA or drug therapy in 3 patients. The pathological examination showed 28 clear cell renal cell carcinomas, 3 chromophobe renal cell carcinomas, 3 TFE-3 infusion related renal cell carcinomas, 2 metanephric adenomas, 1 acidophile adenoma and 2 angioleiomyolipomas. One positive surgical margin occurred in RAPN group for cystic components. No evidence of tumor progression observed during follow-up. Conclusions RAPN is safe and effective in treating TITs when performed by an experienced surgeon at a high-volume institution. Further prospective and large-scale study was warranted to evaluate the long-term outcomes. Key words: Kidney neoplasms; Partial nephrectomy; Totally intrarenal tumors; Robot

Comparison of Short-Term Functional, Oncological, and Perioperative Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Beyond the Learning Curve

To compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) when performed by highly experienced surgeons. A prospective multicenter study was conducted, including the 50 last patients having undergone LPN and RPN for T1-T2 renal tumors in two institutions between 2013 and 2016, performed by two different surgeons with an experience of over 200 procedures each in LPN and RPN, respectively, at the beginning of the study. Perioperative parameters and functional and oncological outcomes were collected and compared between the LPN and RPN groups. The laparoscopic approach was associated with a longer warm ischemia time (15.7 versus 23 minutes; P < .001) and hospital stay (3.6 versus 4.6 days; P = .01). Conversely, estimated blood loss was significantly higher in the RPN group (381 mL versus 215 mL; P < .001), but transfusion rates were similar between the two groups (8% versus 6%; P = .33). In the RPN group, three patients (6%) required conversion to open partial nephrectomy and three patients (6%) required a conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN), while no conversion was needed in the LPN group. There were no differences in terms of perioperative complications, and change in renal function was comparable in the two groups postoperatively. Positive surgical margin rates were similar in the RPN and LPN groups (2% versus 6%; P = .36). After a median follow-up of 19 and 14 months in the RPN and LPN groups, respectively (P = .38), recurrence-free survivals did not differ significantly (P = .94). In this series, perioperative and short-term oncological and functional outcomes appeared broadly comparable between RPN and LPN when performed by highly experienced surgeons.