Kazushi Tanaka1,2, Jun Teishima3,2, Atsushi Takenaka4,2, Ryoichi Shiroki5,2, Yasuyuki Kobayashi6,2, Kazunori Hattori7,2, Hiro-Omi Kanayama8,2, Shigeo Horie9,2, Yasushi Yoshino10,2, Masato Fujisawa1,2. 1. Division of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan. 2. Japanese Society of Endourology Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Study Group, Kobe, Japan. 3. Department of Urology, Institute of Biomedical and Health Science, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan. 4. Division of Urology, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan. 5. Department of Urology, Fujita Health University, Toyoake, Japan. 6. Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Okayama, Japan. 7. Department of Urology, St. Luke's International Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 8. Department of Urology, Tokushima University Graduate School, Tokushima, Japan. 9. Department of Urology, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan. 10. Department of Urology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy compared with those of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for T1 renal tumors in Japanese centers. METHODS: Patients with a T1 renal tumor who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy were eligible for inclusion in the present study. The primary end-point consisted of three components: a negative surgical margin, no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery and a warm ischemia time ≤25 min. We compared data from these patients with the data from a retrospective study of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy carried out in Japan. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were registered in the present study; 105 underwent robotic partial nephrectomy. The proportion of patients who met the primary end-point was 91.3% (95% confidence interval 84.1-95.9%), which was significantly higher than 23.3% in the historical data. Major complications were seen in 19 patients (18.1%). The mean change in the estimated glomerular filtration rate in the operated kidney, 180 days postoperatively, was -10.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval -12.3-9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic partial nephrectomy for patients with a T1 renal tumor is a safe, feasible and more effective operative method compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. It can be anticipated that robotic partial nephrectomy will become more widely used in Japan in the future.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy compared with those of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for T1 renal tumors in Japanese centers. METHODS:Patients with a T1 renal tumor who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy were eligible for inclusion in the present study. The primary end-point consisted of three components: a negative surgical margin, no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery and a warm ischemia time ≤25 min. We compared data from these patients with the data from a retrospective study of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy carried out in Japan. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were registered in the present study; 105 underwent robotic partial nephrectomy. The proportion of patients who met the primary end-point was 91.3% (95% confidence interval 84.1-95.9%), which was significantly higher than 23.3% in the historical data. Major complications were seen in 19 patients (18.1%). The mean change in the estimated glomerular filtration rate in the operated kidney, 180 days postoperatively, was -10.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval -12.3-9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic partial nephrectomy for patients with a T1 renal tumor is a safe, feasible and more effective operative method compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. It can be anticipated that robotic partial nephrectomy will become more widely used in Japan in the future.
Authors: Ahmed Al Asker; Abdulmalik Addar; Mohammed Alghamdi; Saud Alawad; Mohammed Alharbi; Saeed Bin Hamri; Nasser Albqami; Abdullah Alkhayal; Khaled Alrabeeah Journal: J Kidney Cancer VHL Date: 2021-06-17