Literature DB >> 22050488

Multi-institutional analysis of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal tumors >4 cm versus ≤ 4 cm in 445 consecutive patients.

Firas Petros1, Shyam Sukumar, Georges-Pascal Haber, Lori Dulabon, Sam Bhayani, Michael Stifelman, Jihad Kaouk, Craig Rogers.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) has emerged as a viable approach to minimally invasive surgery for small renal tumors. There are few reports of RPN for tumors >4 cm. Our objective was to evaluate outcomes of RPN for tumors >4 cm compared with RPN for tumors ≤ 4 cm in a large multi-institutional study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed data for 445 consecutive patients who underwent RPN by experienced surgeons at four academic institutions from 2006 to 2010. Patients were stratified into two groups according to radiographic tumor size. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and oncologic outcomes were recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 83 of 445 (18.7%) patients had tumors >4 cm with a median radiographic tumor size of 5.0 cm (4.1-11 cm). Patients with tumors >4 cm had a higher proportion of hilar tumors (9.8% vs 4.7%, P<0.001), a higher mean R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score (8.0 vs 6.3, P<0.01), longer warm ischemia time (WIT) (24 vs 17 min, P<0.001), and an increased rate of collecting system repair (72.2% vs 51.6%, P=0.006) compared with patients with tumors ≤ 4 cm. Functional outcomes and complications were similar between groups. There were no positive margins in patients with tumors >4 cm and only one recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: In the largest multi-institutional series of RPN for tumors >4 cm, we demonstrate safety, feasibility, and efficacy of RPN for tumors >4 cm. Patients with tumors >4 cm had a higher nephrometry score, longer WIT, and slightly higher estimated blood loss compared with patients who had tumors ≤ 4 cm, but there was no increased risk of adverse outcomes in the hands of experienced surgeons.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22050488     DOI: 10.1089/end.2011.0340

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  19 in total

1.  Robotic surgery and hemostatic agents in partial nephrectomy: a high rate of success without vascular clamping.

Authors:  Luca Morelli; John Morelli; Matteo Palmeri; Cristiano D'Isidoro; Emanuele Federico Kauffmann; Dario Tartaglia; Giovanni Caprili; Roberta Pisano; Simone Guadagni; Gregorio Di Franco; Giulio Di Candio; Franco Mosca
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2015-06-30

2.  Split renal function of both kidneys after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal tumor larger than 4 cm.

Authors:  Sheng-Han Tsai; Yi-Chen Lai; Nai-Yuan Wu; Hsiao-Jen Chung
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Can selective arterial clamping with fluorescence imaging preserve kidney function during robotic partial nephrectomy?

Authors:  Tyler R McClintock; Marc A Bjurlin; James S Wysock; Michael S Borofsky; Tracy P Marien; Chinonyerem Okoro; Michael D Stifelman
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  3D-printed soft-tissue physical models of renal malignancies for individualized surgical simulation: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Michael M Maddox; Allison Feibus; James Liu; Julie Wang; Raju Thomas; Jonathan L Silberstein
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-01-20

5.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Early single Canadian institution experience.

Authors:  Guillaume Ploussard; Richard Haddad; Evan Kovac; Patrick Richard; Maurice Anidjar; Franck Bladou
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Tumor complexity and the impact on MIC and trifecta in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a multi-center study of over 500 cases.

Authors:  Burkhard Ubrig; Alexander Roosen; Christian Wagner; Guenter Trabs; Frank Schiefelbein; Jorn H Witt; Georg Schoen; Nina Natascha Harke
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Oncologic outcomes of patients with positive surgical margin after partial nephrectomy: a 25-year single institution experience.

Authors:  Firas G Petros; Michael J Metcalfe; Kai-Jie Yu; Sarp K Keskin; Bryan M Fellman; Courtney M Chang; Cindy Gu; Pheroze Tamboli; Surena F Matin; Jose A Karam; Christopher G Wood
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for complex renal masses.

Authors:  Michael W Patton; Daniel A Salevitz; Mark D Tyson; Paul E Andrews; Erin N Ferrigni; Rafael N Nateras; Erik P Castle
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2015-12-24

Review 9.  Expanding utilization of robotic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1b and complex T1a renal masses.

Authors:  Marco Borghesi; Riccardo Schiavina; Melanie Gan; Giacomo Novara; Alexandre Mottrie; Vincenzo Ficarra
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-05-05       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Renal functional outcomes after robotic multiplex partial nephrectomy: the National Cancer Institute experience with robotic partial nephrectomy for 3 or more tumors in a single kidney.

Authors:  Ryan A Hankins; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Hong Truong; Joanna Shih; Gennady Bratslavsky; Peter A Pinto; W Marston Linehan; Adam R Metwalli
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 2.370

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.