OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) using robotic and laparoscopic ultrasound probe for tumor identification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 75 consecutive RPN procedures using a laparoscopic ultrasound probe (January 2009- November 2010) and 75 consecutive RPN procedures using a robotic ultrasound probe (November 2010- November 2011) were collected. Perioperative outcomes of the two groups were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients underwent 75 consecutive RPN using the laparoscopic ultrasound probe followed by 73 patients who underwent 75 consecutive RPNs using the robotic ultrasound probe. Characteristics were similar between groups, and tumors had a similar complexity (mean nephrometry score 6.6 vs. 6.8, p=0.534), mean operating room time (234 vs. 218 min, p=0.095), mean console time (173 vs. 156 min, p=0.071), mean blood loss (171 mL vs. 164 mL, p=0.79), and positive tumor margin rates (1.2% vs. 2.2%, p=1) did not achieve significance. All patients are free of cancer recurrence after a mean follow up of 25.7 months in the laparoscopic probe group and of 10.2 months in the robotic probe group. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic ultrasound probes for tumor identification during RPN had comparable perioperative outcomes and surgical margin rates as a laparoscopic ultrasound probe, but with the advantage of surgeon autonomy.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) using robotic and laparoscopic ultrasound probe for tumor identification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 75 consecutive RPN procedures using a laparoscopic ultrasound probe (January 2009- November 2010) and 75 consecutive RPN procedures using a robotic ultrasound probe (November 2010- November 2011) were collected. Perioperative outcomes of the two groups were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients underwent 75 consecutive RPN using the laparoscopic ultrasound probe followed by 73 patients who underwent 75 consecutive RPNs using the robotic ultrasound probe. Characteristics were similar between groups, and tumors had a similar complexity (mean nephrometry score 6.6 vs. 6.8, p=0.534), mean operating room time (234 vs. 218 min, p=0.095), mean console time (173 vs. 156 min, p=0.071), mean blood loss (171 mL vs. 164 mL, p=0.79), and positive tumor margin rates (1.2% vs. 2.2%, p=1) did not achieve significance. All patients are free of cancer recurrence after a mean follow up of 25.7 months in the laparoscopic probe group and of 10.2 months in the robotic probe group. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic ultrasound probes for tumor identification during RPN had comparable perioperative outcomes and surgical margin rates as a laparoscopic ultrasound probe, but with the advantage of surgeon autonomy.
Authors: Stefano Puliatti; Ahmed Eissa; Enrico Checcucci; Pietro Piazza; Marco Amato; Stefania Ferretti; Simone Scarcella; Juan Gomez Rivas; Mark Taratkin; Josè Marenco; Ines Belenchon Rivero; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Giovanni Cacciamani; Ahmed El-Sherbiny; Ahmed Zoeir; Abdelhamid M El-Bahnasy; Ruben De Groote; Alexandre Mottrie; Salvatore Micali Journal: Asian J Urol Date: 2022-06-01
Authors: Lucas Teixeira Batista; José Guilherme Reis de Oliveira; Vitor Parente Gouvea; Leonardo Azevedo de Souza; Rafael Tourinho-Barbosa Journal: Acta Cir Bras Date: 2022-09-19 Impact factor: 1.564