Literature DB >> 29278580

Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair, bicenter analysis with cost comparison using time-driven activity-based costing.

Aaron A Laviana1, Hung-Jui Tan2, Jim C Hu3, Alon Z Weizer4, Sam S Chang1, Daniel A Barocas1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To perform a bicenter, retrospective study of perioperative outcomes of retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN) and assess costs using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). We identified 355 consecutive patients who underwent RALPN at University of California Los Angeles and the University of Michigan during 2009-2016. We matched according to RENAL nephrometry score, date, and institution for 78 retroperitoneal versus 78 transperitoneal RALPN. Unadjusted analyses were performed using McNemar's Chi-squared or paired t test, and adjusted analyses were performed using multivariable repeated measures regression analysis. From multivariable models, predicted probabilities were derived according to approach. Cost analysis was performed using TDABC. RECENT
FINDINGS: Patients treated with retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal RALPN were similar in age (P = 0.490), sex (P = 0.715), BMI (P = 0.273), and comorbidity (P = 0.393). Most tumors were posterior or lateral in both the retroperitoneal (92.3%) and transperitoneal (85.9%) groups. Retroperitoneal RALPN was associated with shorter operative times (167.0 versus 191.1 min, P = 0.001) and length of stay (LOS) (1.8 versus 2.7 days, P < 0.001). There were no differences in renal function preservation or cancer control. In adjusted analyses, retroperitoneal RALPN was 17.6-min shorter (P < 0.001) and had a 76% lower probability of LOS at least 2 days (P < 0.001). Utilizing TDABC, transperitoneal RALPN added $2337 in cost when factoring in disposable equipment, operative time, LOS, and personnel.
SUMMARY: In two high-volume, tertiary centers, retroperitoneal RALPN is associated with reduced operative times and shortened LOS in posterior and lateral tumors, whereas sharing similar clinicopathologic outcomes, which may translate into lower healthcare costs. Further investigation into anterior tumors is needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29278580     DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Urol        ISSN: 0963-0643            Impact factor:   2.309


  7 in total

Review 1.  Trans-peritoneal vs. retroperitoneal robotic assisted partial nephrectomy in posterior renal tumours: need for a risk-stratified patient individualised approach. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andrew McLean; Ankur Mukherjee; Chandan Phukan; Rajan Veeratterapillay; Naeem Soomro; Bhaskar Somani; Bhavan Prasad Rai
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2019-05-14

2.  Retroperitoneal versus transepritoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for postero-lateral renal masses: an international multicenter analysis.

Authors:  Umberto Carbonara; Daniel Eun; Ithaar Derweesh; Umberto Capitanio; Antonio Celia; Cristian Fiori; Enrico Checcucci; Daniele Amparore; Jennifer Lee; Alessandro Larcher; Devin Patel; Margaret Meagher; Fabio Crocerossa; Alessandro Veccia; Lance J Hampton; Francesco Montorsi; Francesco Porpiglia; Riccardo Autorino
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Comparison of Outcomes Between Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Meta-Analysis Based on Comparative Studies.

Authors:  Daqing Zhu; Xue Shao; Gang Guo; Nandong Zhang; Taoping Shi; Yi Wang; Liangyou Gu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 4.  The future of "Retro" robotic partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  David M Strauss; Randall Lee; Fenizia Maffucci; Daniel Abbott; Selma Masic; Alexander Kutikov
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05

Review 5.  Retroperitoneal Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Comparative Outcomes.

Authors:  Umberto Carbonara; Fabio Crocerossa; Riccardo Campi; Alessandro Veccia; Giovanni E Cacciamani; Daniele Amparore; Enrico Checcucci; Davide Loizzo; Angela Pecoraro; Michele Marchioni; Chiara Lonati; Chandru P Sundaram; Reza Mehrazin; James Porter; Jihad H Kaouk; Francesco Porpiglia; Pasquale Ditonno; Riccardo Autorino
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-04-26

6.  Novel Gerota-edge-sling technique facilitates retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a comparative study.

Authors:  Wei Chen; Qixiang Fang; Haomin Ren; Lei Ma; Jin Zeng; Shangshu Ding; Dapeng Wu
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 2.090

7.  Transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal minimally invasive partial nephrectomy: comparison of perioperative outcomes and functional follow-up in a large multi-institutional cohort (The RECORD 2 Project).

Authors:  Francesco Porpiglia; Andrea Mari; Daniele Amparore; Cristian Fiori; Alessandro Antonelli; Walter Artibani; Pierluigi Bove; Eugenio Brunocilla; Umberto Capitanio; Luigi Da Pozzo; Fabrizio Di Maida; Paolo Gontero; Nicola Longo; Giancarlo Marra; Bernardo Rocco; Riccardo Schiavina; Claudio Simeone; Salvatore Siracusano; Riccardo Tellini; Carlo Terrone; Donata Villari; Vincenzo Ficarra; Marco Carini; Andrea Minervini
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-08-27       Impact factor: 4.584

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.