Literature DB >> 21333338

Outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy for renal masses with nephrometry score of ≥7.

Michael A White1, Georges-Pascal Haber, Riccardo Autorino, Rakesh Khanna, Adrian V Hernandez, Sylvain Forest, Bo Yang, Fatih Altunrende, Robert J Stein, Jihad H Kaouk.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic partial nephrectomy for patients with complex renal masses.
METHODS: We reviewed the data for 164 consecutive patients who had undergone transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy at a tertiary care center from February 2007 to June 2010. Of the 112 patients who had available imaging studies to review, 67 were identified and classified as having a moderately or highly complex renal mass according to the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score (≥7) (tumor size-[R]adius, location and depth-[E]xophytic or endophytic; nearness to the renal sinus fat or collecting system [N]; anterior or posterior position [A], and polar vs non-polar location [L]). The preoperative, perioperative, pathologic, and functional outcomes data were analyzed.
RESULTS: The median body mass index was 29.6 kg/m(2) (range 19.9-44.8). Of the 67 patients, 32 were men and 35 were women, with 32 right-sided masses and 35 left-sided masses. The median tumor size was 3.7 cm (range 1.2-11), and the median operative time was 180 minutes (range 150-180). The median estimated blood loss was 200 mL (range 100-375), and the warm ischemia time was 19.0 minutes (range 15-26). The median hospital stay was 3.0 days (range 3-4). The estimated glomerular filtration rate was calculated at a median decrease of 11.1 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (range 9-1.3). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications, 2 grade 1, 12 grade 2, and 1 grade 3 complication occurred. All margins were pathologically negative, except for 1, and, after a mean follow-up of 10 months, no recurrences had developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic partial nephrectomy is a safe and feasible option for moderately or highly complex renal masses determined by the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score. The warm ischemia time, blood loss, and complications were increased with highly complex masses.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21333338     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  17 in total

1.  Endoscopic robot-assisted simple enucleation (ERASE) for clinical T1 renal masses: description of the technique and early postoperative results.

Authors:  Andrea Minervini; Agostino Tuccio; Lorenzo Masieri; Domenico Veneziano; Gianni Vittori; Giampaolo Siena; Mauro Gacci; Graziano Vignolini; Andrea Mari; Arcangelo Sebastianelli; Matteo Salvi; Sergio Serni; Marco Carini
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Pelvic angiomyolipoma.

Authors:  Tristan M Nicholson; Granville L Lloyd; Guan Wu
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Indocyanine green (ICG)-based fluorescence navigation system for discrimination of kidney cancer from normal parenchyma: application during partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Yozo Mitsui; Hiroaki Shiina; Naoko Arichi; Takeo Hiraoka; Shogo Inoue; Masahiro Sumura; Satoshi Honda; Hiroaki Yasumoto; Mikio Igawa
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  Perioperative and renal functional outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for renal tumours of high surgical complexity: a single-institute comparison between clampless and clamped procedures.

Authors:  Paolo Verze; Paolo Fedelini; Francesco Chiancone; Vito Cucchiara; Roberto La Rocca; Maurizio Fedelini; Clemente Meccariello; Alessandro Palmieri; Vincenzo Mirone
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Open partial nephrectomy: ancient art or currently available technique?

Authors:  Mauro Seveso; Fabio Grizzi; Giorgio Bozzini; Alberto Mandressi; Giorgio Guazzoni; Gianluigi Taverna
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 6.  Current status of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Jose M Reyes; Marc C Smaldone; Robert G Uzzo; Rosalia Viterbo
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Anatomic complexity quantitated by nephrometry score is associated with prolonged warm ischemia time during robotic partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tomaszewski; Marc C Smaldone; Reza Mehrazin; Neil Kocher; Timothy Ito; Philip Abbosh; Jacob Baber; Alexander Kutikov; Rosalia Viterbo; David Y T Chen; Daniel J Canter; Robert G Uzzo
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 8.  Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Endophytic Tumors.

Authors:  Dae Keun Kim; Christos Komninos; Lawrence Kim; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 3.092

9.  Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: analysis of the first 100 cases from a single institution.

Authors:  Scott Tobis; Sriram Venigalla; Joy K Knopf; Emelian Scosyrev; Erdal N Erturk; Dragan J Golijanin; Jean V Joseph; Hani Rashid; Guan Wu
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-06-10

10.  Robotic and open partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors: a matched-pair comparison with a long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Yubin Wang; Jinkai Shao; Xin Ma; Qingshan Du; Huijie Gong; Xu Zhang
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.