scholarly journals Trifecta Outcomes in Open, Laparoscopy or Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: Does the Surgical Approach Matter?

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ketan Mehra ◽  
Ramanitharan Manikandan ◽  
Lalgudi Narayanan Dorairajan ◽  
Sreenivasan Sreerag ◽  
Amit Jain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Important Position ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Preoperative Creatinine

This retrospective study evaluated perioperative outcomes of open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and identified predictive factors of Trifecta achievement for renal tumors that underwent partial nephrectomy (PN) in a single institutional cohort. The study involved patients who underwent PN from January 2011 to July 2018. Trifecta was defined as absence of perioperative complications, no positive surgical margins, and ischemia time <30 min. Fifty-five PN procedures were reviewed: 28 OPN, 14 LPN, and 13 RAPN. OPN, LPN and RAPN had similar median tumor size (5.75, 5.25, and 5 cm), nephrometry score (7, 6, and 6), and preoperative creatinine (1.09, 1.1, and 1.1 mg/dl, respectively). Blood loss was higher for OPN (550 ml) than for LPN (400 ml) and RAPN (300 ml), P = 0.042. Drain was removed after 6 days in OPN which was higher than LPN and RAPN (4.5 and 4 days, respectively), P = 0.008. OPN, LPN, and RAPN had similar median operative time (190, 180, and 180 min, respectively), P = 0.438. Median postoperative stay for OPN, LPN, and RAPN was 5, 6.5, and 10 days, respectively. Trifecta outcomes of 73.1%, 64.3%, and 61.53% were achieved in OPN, LPN, and RAPN, respectively, P = 0.730. It was concluded that Trifecta outcomes had no significant difference among OPN, LPN, and RAPN. LPN can produce as good results as RAPN. Keeping in mind the cost-effectiveness, LPN holds an important position in developing countries where expenditure by patient is a major factor.

scholarly journals Comparison of robotic and open partial nephrectomy: Single-surgeon matched cohort study

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong Jin Oh ◽  
Seoksoo Byun ◽  
Sung Kyu Hong ◽  
Chang Wook Jeong ◽  
Sang Eun Lee
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Tumour Size ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
Matched Cohort ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Asa Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

Introduction: We present comparative outcomes among matched patients who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) or open partial nephrectomy (OPN) by a single surgeon at a single institution.Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 200 patients who underwent RPN (n = 100) or OPN (n = 100) between May 2003 and May 2013. The patients who underwent RPN were matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, as well as tumour size, side and location. Perioperative outcomes were compared.Results: There was no significant difference between the 2 cohorts with respect to patient age, BMI, ASA score, preoperative glomerular filtration rate, tumour size and the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score. The mean operative time was longer in the RPN group, but there were no significant differences with respect to warm ischemic time and postoperative renal function. The length of hospitalization and use of postoperative analgesics (ketoprofen) were more favourable in the RPN cohort. There was no significant difference in the mean estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, or complications between the cohorts.Conclusions: Considering the perioperative and postoperative parameters, RPN is a viable option as a nephron-sparing surgical procedure for small renal masses that yields outcomes comparable to those achieved with OPN. Despite matched cohort analysis among patients who underwent PN by a single surgeon, there may be inherent selection bias; therefore future prospective trials are needed.

Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for the management of highly complex renal tumors with PADUA score ⩾10: A single center analysis.

2021 ◽  
pp. 039156032110016
Author(s):  
Francesco Chiancone ◽  
Marco Fabiano ◽  
Clemente Meccariello ◽  
Maurizio Fedelini ◽  
Francesco Persico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Operative Complications ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Post Operative Complications

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy (PN) for renal tumors of high surgical complexity (PADUA score ⩾10). Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 93 consecutive patients who underwent PN at our department from January 2015 to September 2019. 21 patients underwent open partial nephrectomy (OPN) (Group A) and 72 underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) (Group B). All OPNs were performed with a retroperitoneal approach, while all LPNs were performed with a transperitoneal approach by a single surgical team. Post-operative complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo system. Results: The two groups showed no difference in terms of patients’ demographics as well as tumor characteristics in all variables. Group A was found to be similar to group B in terms of operation time ( p = 0.781), conversion to radical nephrectomy ( p = 0.3485), and positive surgical margins ( p = 0.338) while estimated blood loss ( p = 0.0205), intra-operative ( p = 0.0104), and post-operative ( p = 0.0081) transfusion rates, drainage time ( p = 0.0012), pain score at post-operative day 1 (<0.0001) were significantly lower in Group B. The rate of enucleation and enucleoresection/polar resection was similar ( p = 0.1821) among the groups. Logistic regression analysis indicated that preoperative factors were not independently associated with the surgical approach. There was a statistically significant difference in complication rate (<0.0001) between the two groups even if no significant difference in terms of grade ⩾3 post-operative complications ( p = 0.3382) was detected. Discussion: LPN represents a feasible and safe approach for high complex renal tumors if performed in highly experienced laparoscopic centers. This procedure offers good intraoperative outcomes and a low rate of post-operative complications.

scholarly journals Tumor volume and tumor crossing of the axial renal midline predict renal function after robotic partial nephrectomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haruyuki Ohsugi ◽  
Kyojiro Akiyama ◽  
Hisanori Taniguchi ◽  
Masaaki Yanishi ◽  
Motohiko Sugi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Tumor Volume ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Perioperative Morbidity

AbstractThere are several nephrometry scoring systems for predicting surgical complexity and potential perioperative morbidity. The R.E.N.A.L. scoring system, one of the most well-known nephrometry scoring systems, emphasizes the features on which it is based (Radius, Exophytic/endophytic, Nearness to collecting system or sinus, Anterior/posterior, and Location relative to polar lines). The ability of these nephrometry scoring systems to predict loss of renal function after robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) remains controversial. Therefore, we verified which combination of factors from nephrometry scoring systems, including tumor volume, was the most significant predictor of postoperative renal function. Patients who underwent RPN for cT1 renal tumors in our hospital were reviewed retrospectively (n = 163). The preoperative clinical data (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], comorbidities, and nephrometry scoring systems including R.E.N.A.L.) and perioperative outcomes were evaluated. We also calculated the tumor volume using the equation applied to an ellipsoid by three-dimensional computed tomography. The primary outcome was reduced eGFR, which was defined as an eGFR reduction of ≥ 20% from baseline to 6 months after RPN. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationships between preoperative variables and reduced eGFR. Of 163 patients, 24 (14.7%) had reduced eGFR. Multivariable analyses indicated that tumor volume (cutoff value ≥ 14.11 cm3, indicating a sphere with a diameter ≥ approximately 3 cm) and tumor crossing of the axial renal midline were independent factors associated with a reduced eGFR (odds ratio [OR] 4.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69–12.30; P = 0.003 and OR 3.50; 95% CI 1.30–9.46; P = 0.034, respectively). Our classification system using these two factors showed a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) than previous nephrometry scoring systems (AUC = 0.786 vs. 0.653–0.719), and it may provide preoperative information for counseling patients about renal function after RPN.

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daisuke Motoyama ◽  
Ryota Aki ◽  
Yuto Matsushita ◽  
Keita Tamura ◽  
Toshiki Ito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Da Vinci ◽  
Operative Procedure ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Da Vinci Xi ◽  
Ischemic Time ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

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.

Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 394-394
Author(s):  
Mehrdad Alemozaffar ◽  
Steven Lee Chang ◽  
Ravi Kacker ◽  
Maryellen Sun ◽  
William C DeWolf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Hospital Costs ◽  
Cost Comparison ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Fixed Costs ◽  
Average Hospital ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy

394 Background: Laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy (LPN and RPN) are increasingly common minimally invasive alternatives to open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for management of renal tumors. The cost discrepancies of these approaches warrants evaluation. We compared hospital costs associated with RPN, LPN, and OPN. Methods: Variable hospital costs including operating room (OR) time, supplies, anesthesia, inpatient care, radiology, pharmacy, and laboratory charges were captured for 25 patients who underwent OPN, LPN, and RPN at our institution between 11/2008 -9/2010. Fixed costs of acquisition of a laparoscopic suite and a robotic system (including maintenance) were amortized over 7 years. We considered alternative scenarios through one-way and multi-way sensitivity analysis. Results: We found similar overall variable costs for OPN, LPN, and RPN. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that RPN and LPN are more cost effective than OPN (excluding fixed costs) if the average hospital stay is < 2 days, or OR time less is than 204 and 196 mins, respectively. By including fixed costs of equipment, RPN and LPN are always more costly than OPN. Conclusions: There was no difference among variable hospital costs of OPN, LPN, and RPN. Minimizing OR time and hospital stay reduces RPN and LPN costs to levels comparable to OPN. Inclusion of fixed costs makes LPN and RPN more expensive than OPN, but increased utilization and efficiency can decrease cost per case. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Impact of Robotic Fellowship Experience on Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Moriarty ◽  
Kenneth G. Nepple ◽  
Chad R. Tracy ◽  
Michael E. Strigenz ◽  
Daniel K. Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Positive Margin ◽  
Warm Ischemia ◽  
Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Initial Experience ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Nephrometry Score ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: We analyzed differences in patient selection and perioperative outcomes between robotic-fellowship trained and non-fellowship trained surgeons in their initial experience with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Methods: Data through surgeon case 10 was analyzed. Forty patients were identified from two fellowship trained surgeons (n = 20) and two non-fellowship trained surgeons (n = 20). Results: Fellowship trained surgeons performed surgery on masses of higher nephrometry score (8.0 vs. 6.0, p = 0.007) and more posterior location (60 vs. 25%, p = 0.03). Retroperitoneal approach was more common (50 vs. 0%, p = 0.0003). Fellowship trained surgeons trended toward shorter warm ischemia time (25.5 vs. 31.0 min, p = 0.08). There was no significant difference in perioperative complications (35 vs. 35%, p = 0.45) or final positive margin rates (0 vs. 15%, p = 0.23). Conclusion: Fellowship experience may allow for treating more challenging and posterior tumors in initial practice and significantly more comfort performing retroperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

scholarly journals Comparison Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for Complex Renal Tumors (with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7): a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Li Jiang ◽  
Xin Xiao ◽  
Fu-Sheng Peng ◽  
Tian-Li Shi ◽  
Xiao-Hui Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Intraoperative Complication ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

Abstract BackgroundTo compare the perioperative outcomes of Robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register for studies from 2000 to 2020 to evaluate the perioperative outcomes RPN and LPN in patients with a RENALnephrometry score≥7. We used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data. ResultsSeven studies were acquired in our study. No significant differences were found in the estimated blood loss (WMD: WMD: 34.49, 95% CI -75.16-144.14, p=0.54), hospital stay (WMD: -0.59 95% CI -1.24–0.06, p=0.07), operating time (WMD: -22.45, 95%CI: -35.06 to-9.85, ), postive surgical margin (OR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.65–1.11, p =0.23) and transfusion (OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.48–1.08, p =0.11).between the two groups. RPN get better outcomes in postoperative renal function (WMD: 3.32, 95% CI 0.73–5.91, p=0.01), warm ischenia time (WMD: -6.96, 95% CI -7.30–-6.62, p <0.0001), conversion( OR: 0.34, 95%CI: 0.17 to 0.66, p=0.002) and intraoperative complication (OR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.28–0.97, p=0.04).ConclusionRPN could get better perioerative clinical outcomes than LPN for treatment of Complex Renal Tumors( with a RENALnephrometry score≥7).

scholarly journals PD20-04 PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES OF ROBOTIC AND OPEN PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR MODERATELY AND HIGHLY COMPLEX T1B RENAL TUMORS

2017 ◽  
Vol 197 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Önder Kara ◽  
Matthew J. Maurice ◽  
Pascal Mouracade ◽  
Ercan Malkoç ◽  
Julien Dagenais ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy

scholarly journals A Single Surgeon’s Experience with Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary Klaassen ◽  
Robert M. Kohut ◽  
Dhruti Patel ◽  
Martha K. Terris ◽  
Rabii Madi
Keyword(s):  
Glomerular Filtration Rate ◽  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Filtration Rate ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Preoperative Patient

Objective. To report the perioperative outcomes of patients treated with partial nephrectomy by a single surgeon using three surgical modalities—open, laparoscopic, and robotic. Methods. Between August 2006 and February 2012, 106 consecutive patients underwent open partial nephrectomy (OPN) (n=23), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) (n=48), and robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) (n=35) by a single surgeon. Clinical variables, operative parameters, and renal functional outcomes were analyzed. Results. Preoperative patient characteristics were similar except for baseline glomerular filtration rate (GFR), which was highest in the RPN group (P=0.004). Surgery time was longest in the RPN group (244 minutes) and shortest in the OPN group (163 minutes, P<0.0001). Patients who had OPN had the highest incidence of 30-day complications (30%), while the RPN approach had the lowest (14%, P=0.008). Conclusions. When performed by a single surgeon, robotic partial nephrectomy appears to be associated with fewer complications than both open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Kidney function was not affected by surgical approach.

scholarly journals Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy For Renal Tumors With A RENAL Nephrometry Score≥7: A System Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin-Biao Zhou ◽  
Xin Xiao ◽  
Tian-Li Shi ◽  
Xiao-Hui Huang ◽  
Yu-Li Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Nephrometry Score ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

Abstract Background To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for complex renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register for studies from 2000 to 2020 to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of RPN and LPN in patients with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7. We used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data. Results Seven studies were acquired in our study. No significant differences were found in the estimated blood loss (WMD: 34.49; 95% CI: -75.16-144.14; p=0.54), hospital stay (WMD: -0.59; 95% CI: -1.24–0.06; p=0.07), positive surgical margin (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.65–1.11; p =0.23), major postoperative complications(OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.52–1.54; p=0.69) and transfusion (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.48–1.08; p =0.11) between the groups. RPN showed better outcomes in the operating time (WMD: -22.45; 95% CI: -35.06 to -9.85; p=0.0005), postoperative renal function (WMD: 3.32; 95% CI: 0.73–5.91; p=0.01), warm ischemia time (WMD: -6.96; 95% CI: -7.30–-6.62; p <0.0001), conversion rate to radical nephrectomy (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.66; p=0.002) and intraoperative complications (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.28–0.97; p=0.04).Conclusions RPN showed better perioperative clinical outcomes than LPN for the treatment of complex renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document