Literature DB >> 22578725

A matched comparison of perioperative outcomes of a single laparoscopic surgeon versus a multisurgeon robot-assisted cohort for partial nephrectomy.

Jonathan S Ellison1, Jeffrey S Montgomery, J Stuart Wolf, Khaled S Hafez, David C Miller, Alon Z Weizer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive nephron sparing surgery is gaining popularity for small renal masses. Few groups have evaluated robot-assisted partial nephrectomy compared to other approaches using comparable patient populations. We present a matched pair analysis of a heterogeneous group of surgeons who performed robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and a single experienced laparoscopic surgeon who performed conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Perioperative outcomes and complications were compared.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All 249 conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy cases from January 2007 to June 2010 were reviewed from our prospectively maintained institutional database. Groups were matched 1:1 (108 matched pairs) by R.E.N.A.L. (radius, exophytic/endophytic properties, nearness of tumor to collecting system or sinus, anterior/posterior, location relative to polar lines) nephrometry score, transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal approach, patient age and hilar nature of the tumor. Statistical analysis was done to compare operative outcomes and complications.
RESULTS: Matched analysis revealed that nephrometry score, age, gender, tumor side and American Society of Anesthesia physical status classification were similar. Operative time favored conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. During the study period robot-assisted partial nephrectomy showed significant improvements in estimated blood loss and warm ischemia time compared to those of the experienced conventional laparoscopic group. Postoperative complication rates, and complication distributions by Clavien classification and type were similar for conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (41.7% and 35.0%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy has a noticeable but rapid learning curve. After it is overcome the robotic procedure results in perioperative outcomes similar to those achieved with conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy done by an experienced surgeon. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy likely improves surgeon and patient accessibility to minimally invasive nephron sparing surgery.
Copyright © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22578725     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.2570

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  20 in total

1.  Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaolong Zhang; Jiajun Yan; Yu Ren; Chong Shen; Xiangrong Ying; Shouhua Pan
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-12-15

2.  Perioperative and long-term renal functional outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a multicenter matched-pair comparison.

Authors:  Jeong Ho Kim; Yong Hyun Park; Yong June Kim; Seok Ho Kang; Seok Soo Byun; Cheol Kwak; Sung Hoo Hong
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Trends in surgical management of T1 renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Jonas Schiffmann; Marco Bianchi; Maxine Sun; Andreas Becker
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Impact of Robotic Fellowship Experience on Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy.

Authors:  Michael A Moriarty; Kenneth G Nepple; Chad R Tracy; Michael E Strigenz; Daniel K Lee; James A Brown
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2016-02-10

5.  Evolution from laparoscopic to robotic nephron sparing surgery: a high-volume laparoscopic center experience on achieving 'trifecta' outcomes.

Authors:  Arie Carneiro; Arjun Sivaraman; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Ettore Di Trapani; Eric Barret; Francois Rozet; Marc Galiano; Facundo Uriburu Pizzaro; Steeve Doizi; Nathalie Cathala; Annick Mombet; Dominique Prapotnich; Xavier Cathelineau
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Impact of three-dimensional vision in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors.

Authors:  Theodoros Tokas; Margaritis Avgeris; Ioannis Leotsakos; Udo Nagele; Ali Serdar Gözen
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2020-12-16

7.  Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: matched-pair comparisons by nephrometry scores.

Authors:  Seol Ho Choo; Seo Yeon Lee; Hyun Hwan Sung; Hwang Gyun Jeon; Byong Chang Jeong; Seong Soo Jeon; Hyun Moo Lee; Han Yong Choi; Seong Il Seo
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  The Effect of the Diffusion of the Surgical Robot on the Hospital-level Utilization of Partial Nephrectomy.

Authors:  Ganesh Sivarajan; Glen B Taksler; Dawn Walter; Cary P Gross; Raul E Sosa; Danil V Makarov
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Impact of fellowship training on robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: benchmarking perioperative safety and outcomes.

Authors:  Abby S Taylor; Bruce Lee; Bhupendra Rawal; David D Thiel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2015-02-04

10.  Comparison of survival and renal function between partial and radical laparoscopic nephrectomy for T1b renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Feiya Yang; Qiang Zhou; Nianzeng Xing
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.553

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.