Literature DB >> 24731125

Propensity-score matched analysis comparing robot-assisted with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

Zhenjie Wu1, Mingmin Li, Shangqing Song, Huamao Ye, Qing Yang, Bing Liu, Chen Cai, Bo Yang, Liang Xiao, Qi Chen, Chen Lü, Xu Gao, Chuanliang Xu, Xiaofeng Gao, Jianguo Hou, Linhui Wang, Yinghao Sun.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the peri-operative and early renal functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for kidney tumours.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 237 patients fulfilling the selection criteria were included, of whom 146 and 91 patients were treated with LPN and RAPN, respectively. To adjust for potential baseline confounders, propensity-score matching was performed. A favourable outcome was defined as a warm ischaemia time (WIT) of ≤20 min, negative surgical margins, no surgical conversion, no Clavien ≥3 complications and no postoperative chronic kidney disease (CKD) upstaging. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed before and after propensity-score matching.
RESULTS: Within the propensity-score-matched cohort, the RAPN group was associated with significantly lower estimated blood loss (EBL; 156 vs 198 mL, mean difference [MD] = -42; P = 0.025), a shorter WIT (22.8 vs 31 min, MD = -8.2; P < 0.001) and a higher proportion of malignant lesions (88.4 vs 67.5%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-5.67; P = 0.023). With regard to early renal functional outcomes, the mean last estimated glomerular filtration rate was 95.8 and 89.4 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) (MD = 6.4; P = 0.01), with a mean ± sd percentage change of -4.8 ± 17.9 and -12.2 ± 16.6 (MD = 7.4; P = 0.018) in the RAPN and LPN groups, respectively. The intra-operative complication rate was significantly lower in the RAPN group (1.3 vs 11.7%; OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.01-0.81; P = 0.018). On multivariable analysis, surgical approach (RAPN vs LPN, OR 5.457, 95% CI 2.075-14.346; P = 0.001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 0.223; 95% CI 0.062-0.811; P = 0.023), diameter-axial-polar score (OR 0.488, 95% CI 0.329-0.723; P < 0.001) and preoperative CKD stage (OR 3.189, 95% CI 1.204-8.446; P = 0.020) were found to be independent predictors of obtaining a favourable outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for potential treatment selection biases, RAPN was found to be superior to LPN for peri-operative outcomes (EBL, WIT and intra-operative complications) and early renal functional preservation.
© 2014 The Authors. BJU International © 2014 BJU International.

Entities:  

Keywords:  complications; functional outcomes; laparoscopic partial nephrectomy; nephron-sparing surgery; robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24731125     DOI: 10.1111/bju.12774

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  13 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy without intracorporeal suturing.

Authors:  Ching-Chia Li; Hsin-Chih Yeh; Hsiang-Ying Lee; Wei-Ming Li; Hung-Lung Ke; Allen Herng Shouh Hsu; Mei Hui Lee; Chia-Chun Tsai; Kuang-Shun Chueh; Chun-Nung Huang; Yii-Her Chou; Chien-Feng Li; Wen-Jeng Wu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-11       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  A propensity score-matched comparison of surgical precision obtained by using volumetric analysis between robot-assisted laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy for T1 renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective non-randomized observational study of initial outcomes.

Authors:  Toshio Takagi; Tsunenori Kondo; Hidekazu Tachibana; Junpei Iizuka; Kenji Omae; Hirohito Kobayashi; Kazuhiko Yoshida; Yasunobu Hashimoto; Kazunari Tanabe
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-06-04       Impact factor: 2.370

5.  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

6.  Novel Intraoperative Navigation Using Ultra-High-Resolution CT in Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy.

Authors:  Kiyoshi Takahara; Yoshiharu Ohno; Kosuke Fukaya; Ryo Matsukiyo; Takuhisa Nukaya; Masashi Takenaka; Kenji Zennami; Manabu Ichino; Naohiko Fukami; Hitomi Sasaki; Mamoru Kusaka; Hiroshi Toyama; Makoto Sumitomo; Ryoichi Shiroki
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 6.639

7.  'Trifecta' outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: Results of the 'low volume' surgeon.

Authors:  Cem Basatac; Haluk Akpinar
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2020 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

8.  Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy in the Era of Robotic Surgery.

Authors:  Hakan Bahadir Haberal; Meylis Artykov; Ahmet Gudeloglu; Sertac Yazici; Cenk Yucel Bilen
Journal:  Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul       Date:  2021-07-02

9.  Robotic Partial Nephrectomy with the Da Vinci Xi.

Authors:  George J S Kallingal; Sanjaya Swain; Fadi Darwiche; Sanoj Punnen; Murugesan Manoharan; Mark L Gonzalgo; Dipen J Parekh
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2016-02-09

10.  The feasibility and safety of modified robot-assisted enucleation for highly complex renal tumors: research on a surgical technique.

Authors:  Zhaoxiang Lu; Jun Zhou; Cheng Yang; Li Zhang; Sheng Tai; Yu Yin; Chaozhao Liang
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.241

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.