OBJECTIVE: To describe the evolution of robotic partial nephrectomy (PN) technique and to analyze the surgical outcomes in a large single institution experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of our institutional review board-approved, prospectively maintained, minimally invasive PN database yielded 252 robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) procedures from June 2007 to October 2010. Our initial experience, adopted from our laparoscopic PN approach included a standard interrupted bolstered renorrhaphy, whereas our contemporary experience included a nonbolstered continuous horizontal mattress stitch for the capsular closure. Perioperative results were evaluated depending on renorrhaphy technique, length of warm ischemia time, and nephrometry scores. RESULTS: Overall, mean tumor size was 3.1 ± 1.6 cm, operative time 190 ± 56 minutes, warm ischemia time 18.2 ± 9.4 minutes, and estimated blood loss 267 ± 275 mL. Significantly better outcomes were noted in the contemporary experience in terms of transfusion rate (8.2% vs 21.9%, P <.001), operative time (181 vs 219 minutes, P <.001), hospital stay (3.6 vs 4.3 days, P = .02), and complication rate (14.4% vs 33.8%, P <.01). Increasing tumor complexity based on RENAL score predicted longer operative time (P <.0001), warm ischemia time (P <.0001), and hospital stay (P <.04), and a greater risk of postoperative complications (P = .003). Of the series, only 2 patients had hemorrhagic complications (0.8%) requiring angioembolization, 4 patients developed urine leaks (1.5%), and 2 positive margins (0.8%) were noted. CONCLUSION: We report the largest single-institution study with RPN to date. Despite it being a relatively nascent procedure, initial results suggest that RPN is an effective approach for minimally invasive nephron-sparing surgery. As experience is gained and the technique for RPN evolves, further improvement in outcomes will be noted.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the evolution of robotic partial nephrectomy (PN) technique and to analyze the surgical outcomes in a large single institution experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of our institutional review board-approved, prospectively maintained, minimally invasive PN database yielded 252 robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) procedures from June 2007 to October 2010. Our initial experience, adopted from our laparoscopic PN approach included a standard interrupted bolstered renorrhaphy, whereas our contemporary experience included a nonbolstered continuous horizontal mattress stitch for the capsular closure. Perioperative results were evaluated depending on renorrhaphy technique, length of warm ischemia time, and nephrometry scores. RESULTS: Overall, mean tumor size was 3.1 ± 1.6 cm, operative time 190 ± 56 minutes, warm ischemia time 18.2 ± 9.4 minutes, and estimated blood loss 267 ± 275 mL. Significantly better outcomes were noted in the contemporary experience in terms of transfusion rate (8.2% vs 21.9%, P <.001), operative time (181 vs 219 minutes, P <.001), hospital stay (3.6 vs 4.3 days, P = .02), and complication rate (14.4% vs 33.8%, P <.01). Increasing tumor complexity based on RENAL score predicted longer operative time (P <.0001), warm ischemia time (P <.0001), and hospital stay (P <.04), and a greater risk of postoperative complications (P = .003). Of the series, only 2 patients had hemorrhagic complications (0.8%) requiring angioembolization, 4 patients developed urine leaks (1.5%), and 2 positive margins (0.8%) were noted. CONCLUSION: We report the largest single-institution study with RPN to date. Despite it being a relatively nascent procedure, initial results suggest that RPN is an effective approach for minimally invasive nephron-sparing surgery. As experience is gained and the technique for RPN evolves, further improvement in outcomes will be noted.
Authors: A C Harbin; G Bandi; A A Vora; X Cheng; V Stanford; K McGeagh; J Murdock; R Ghasemian; J Lynch; F Bedell; M Verghese; J J Hwang Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2013-06-05
Authors: Kenneth G Nepple; Gurdarshan S Sandhu; Craig G Rogers; Mohamad E Allaf; Jihad H Kaouk; Robert S Figenshau; Michael D Stifelman; Sam B Bhayani Journal: Patient Saf Surg Date: 2012-04-02