OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare surgical and pathologic outcomes obtained by elective robot-assisted (RAPN) or open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for small renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2008 and 2010, after protocol design and patient consent, we prospectively collected clinical data for 100 patients who concurrently underwent either OPN (58) or RAPN (42) by an individual experienced surgeon. Clinical data included age, BMI, and past medical history. Operative data included operative time, warm ischemia time (WIT), and estimated blood loss (EBL). Postoperative outcomes included hospital stay (LOS), creatinine variation, Clavien complications, pathologic results, and survival. We stratified the complexity of the renal tumor using the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry score. RESULTS: Of note, RAPN was superior to OPN in terms of EBL (median 143 mL vs. 415; P < 0.001) and LOS (median 3.8 days vs. 6.8; P < 0.0001). The median WIT for the RAPN group was 17.5 minutes (vs. 17.1 OPN; P = 0.3)) and the mean strict operative time was 134.8 minutes (vs. 128.4 OPN; P = 0.097). Regarding immediate, early, and short-term complications, variation of creatinine levels, and pathologic margins, the rates were equivalent for both groups (P > 0.05). According to the R.E.N.A.L nephrometry scores, both groups (RAPN/OPN) had similar rates (%) of low (81/72.4) and intermediate (19/20.7) complexity tumors, though there were 4 high complexity tumors in OPN group (vs. 0; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: We found that RAPN is superior to the reference standard (OPN) surgical treatment of small RCCs in terms of blood loss and length of hospital stay with equivalent complications, warm ischemia time, and effect on renal function. Larger randomized trials with longer follow-up will give us further information and insight into the oncologic equivalence.
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare surgical and pathologic outcomes obtained by elective robot-assisted (RAPN) or open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for small renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2008 and 2010, after protocol design and patient consent, we prospectively collected clinical data for 100 patients who concurrently underwent either OPN (58) or RAPN (42) by an individual experienced surgeon. Clinical data included age, BMI, and past medical history. Operative data included operative time, warm ischemia time (WIT), and estimated blood loss (EBL). Postoperative outcomes included hospital stay (LOS), creatinine variation, Clavien complications, pathologic results, and survival. We stratified the complexity of the renal tumor using the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry score. RESULTS: Of note, RAPN was superior to OPN in terms of EBL (median 143 mL vs. 415; P < 0.001) and LOS (median 3.8 days vs. 6.8; P < 0.0001). The median WIT for the RAPN group was 17.5 minutes (vs. 17.1 OPN; P = 0.3)) and the mean strict operative time was 134.8 minutes (vs. 128.4 OPN; P = 0.097). Regarding immediate, early, and short-term complications, variation of creatinine levels, and pathologic margins, the rates were equivalent for both groups (P > 0.05). According to the R.E.N.A.L nephrometry scores, both groups (RAPN/OPN) had similar rates (%) of low (81/72.4) and intermediate (19/20.7) complexity tumors, though there were 4 high complexity tumors in OPN group (vs. 0; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: We found that RAPN is superior to the reference standard (OPN) surgical treatment of small RCCs in terms of blood loss and length of hospital stay with equivalent complications, warm ischemia time, and effect on renal function. Larger randomized trials with longer follow-up will give us further information and insight into the oncologic equivalence.
Authors: Pooya Banapour; George A Abdelsayed; Zoe Bider-Canfield; Peter A Elliott; Patrick S Kilday; Gary W Chien Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2018-03-19
Authors: Azza M Abdu Allah; Sally M El-Hefnway; Alshimaa M Alhanafy; Ahmed M Zahran; Heba E Kasem Journal: Mol Cell Biochem Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 3.396