Surgical and Functional Outcomes on Omitting Cortical Renorrhaphy During Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: A Match-Paired Analysis

Objectives To assess surgical and functional outcomes in comparison of cortical renorrhaphy omitting, robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (CRO-RAPN), and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (CRO-LPN). Methods Between July 2012 and June 2020, patients with localized clinical T1-2 renal masses who underwent CRO-RAPN or CRO-LPN were reviewed. The outcomes of the CRO-RAPN and CRO-LPN groups were compared using propensity score matching. Trifecta was defined as negative surgical margin, less than 25 minutes of warm ischemic time, and no complications of Clavien-Dindo grade III or more until three months postoperatively. Preservation rate of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was evaluated at six months postoperatively. Results A total of 291 patients, including 210 patients who underwent CRO-RAPN and 81 patients who underwent CRO-LPN, were included, and matched pairs of 150 patients were analyzed. The CRO-RAPN group was associated with a significantly shorter warm ischemic time (13 min vs 20 min, P < 0.001), shorter total operation time (162 min vs 212 min, P < 0.001), less estimated blood loss (40 mL vs 119 mL, P = 0.002), lower incidence of overall complications (3% vs 16%, P = 0.001), higher preservation rate of eGFR at six months postoperatively (93% vs 89%, P = 0.003), and higher trifecta achievement rate (84% vs 64%, P = 0.004) than the CRO-LPN group. Conclusions CRO-RAPN contributes to a shorter warm ischemic time, less blood loss, fewer complications, and preservation of renal function and makes it feasible to achieve a higher rate of trifecta compared to CRO-LPN.

Study on the correlation between preoperative inflammatory indexes and adhesional perinephric fat before laparoscopic partial nephrectomy

Objective This study was aimed to evaluate the effect of preoperative composite inflammatory index on adhesional perinephric fat (APF), providing a help for preoperative risk assessment of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Materials and methods A retrospective study was conducted on 231 patients with renal cell carcinoma, who underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. They were divided into two groups according to whether there was APF during operation. Relevant clinical data, laboratory parameters and imaging examination were obtained before operation to calculate the composite inflammatory index and MAP score. The composite inflammatory index was divided into high value group and low value group by ROC curve method. The related predictive factors of APF were analyzed by logistic regression method. Results The APF was found in 105 patients (45.5%). In multivariate analysis, systemic immune inflammation index (SII) (high/low), MAP score, tumor size and perirenal fat thickness were independent predictors of APF. The operation time of patients with APF was longer, and the difference of blood loss was not statistically significant. Conclusion SII is an independent predictor of APF before laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Trial registration ChiCTR, ChiCTR2100045944. Registered 30 April 2021—Retrospectively registered, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=125703.

Analysis of predictors of adherent perinephric fat and its impact on perioperative outcomes in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a retrospective case–control study

Background Adherent perinephric fat (APF), characterized by inflammatory fat surrounding the kidney, can limit the isolation of renal tumors and increase the operative difficulty in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). The aim of this study was to investigate the predictors of APF and its impact on perioperative outcomes during LPN. Methods A total of 215 consecutive patients undergoing LPN for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from January 2017 to June 2019 at our institute were included. We divided these patients into two groups according to the presence of APF. Radiographic data were retrospectively collected from preoperative cross-sectional imaging. The perioperative clinical parameters were compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the predictive factors of APF. Results APF was identified in 41 patients (19.1%) at the time of LPN. Univariate analysis demonstrated that APF was significantly correlated with the male gender (P = 0.001), higher body mass index (P = 0.002), lower preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (P = 0.004), greater posterior perinephric fat thickness (P< 0.001), greater perinephric stranding (P< 0.001), and higher Mayo Adhesive Probability (MAP) score (P< 0.001). The MAP score (P< 0.001) was the only variable that remained an independent predictor for APF in multivariate analysis. We found that patients with APF had longer operative times (P< 0.001), warm ischemia times (P = 0.001), and greater estimated blood loss (P = 0.003) than those without APF. However, there were no significant differences in surgical approach, transfusion rate, length of postoperative stay, complication rate, or surgical margin between the two groups. Conclusions Several specific clinical and radiographic factors including the MAP score can predict APF. The presence of APF is associated with an increased operative time, warm ischemia time, and greater estimated blood loss but has no impact on other perioperative outcomes in LPN.

Clinical outcomes and effect on intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain of patients undergoing retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors

Objective To explore the clinical outcomes and effect on intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain of patients undergoing the retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RLPN) for complex renal tumors. Methods Fifty patients with complex renal tumor admitted to our hospital from February 2017 to February 2019 were selected as the research object and divided into the RLPN group (given the retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, n = 24) and the OPN group (given the open partial nephrectomy, n = 26) by number table method to compare their various perioperative indicators and serum stress response and analyze the clinical effect of different surgical methods on the complex renal tumor. Results The clinical information of patients in both groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05); in addition to the operative time, the intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, warm ischemia time, and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores of the RLPN group were clearly lower than those of the OPN group (P < 0.05); after treatment, patients in the RLPN group obtained significantly lower white blood cell (WBC) count, cortisol, and c-reactive protein (CRP) levels than the OPN group (P < 0.05); the renal glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of the affected side, quality of life scores, and 3-year overall survival rate of treated patients in the RLPN group were obviously higher than those in the OPN group (P < 0.05); and patients in the RPLN group had significantly lower incidence rate (P < 0.05). Conclusion Compared with OPN, RLPN is more worthy of promotion and application, because it has better treatment outcomes, significantly reduces intraoperative blood loss, alleviates the body stress response and postoperative pain, and improves the quality of life.