INTRODUCTION: We sought to analyze the safety, efficacy, and national trends in the use of robotic radical nephrectomy (RN) and inferior vena cava thrombectomy in patients with renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 872 patients from the National Cancer Database dataset who underwent open (n = 838, 96.1%) or robotic (n = 34, 3.9%) radical nephrectomy with inferior vena cava thrombectomy for cT3b renal cell carcinoma between 2010 and 2014. Length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions and 30-day mortality were compared between the 2 groups. As internal validation, we performed a multi-institutional analysis of 20 patients (9 open [45%] vs. 11 robotic [55%]) undergoing RN with a level II thrombus. Patients were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, peri- and postoperative outcomes. Uni- and multivariable models were used adjusting for clinical and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups in both datasets. In the National Cancer Database, robotic approach was associated with 26% reduction in LOS (P < 0.001) but no difference in readmissions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.05, 4.50; P = 0.925) or 30-day mortality (OR = 2.72; 95% CI = 0.40, 10.86; P = 0.211). In multicenter database, open group had significantly greater blood loss (600 vs. 100.0 mL, P = 0.020). The rate of blood transfusion was higher in the open group, but was not significant (44.4% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.336). Robotic group had a shorter LOS (1 vs. 5 days; P = 0.026). No difference was seen between the open and robotic groups in terms of operative time (226 vs. 260 minutes, P = 0.922) and postoperative complications (P > 0.999). CONCLUSION: In select cases and experienced hands, robotic approach offers a reasonable alternative to open surgery without an increased complication rate.
INTRODUCTION: We sought to analyze the safety, efficacy, and national trends in the use of robotic radical nephrectomy (RN) and inferior vena cava thrombectomy in patients with renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 872 patients from the National Cancer Database dataset who underwent open (n = 838, 96.1%) or robotic (n = 34, 3.9%) radical nephrectomy with inferior vena cava thrombectomy for cT3b renal cell carcinoma between 2010 and 2014. Length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions and 30-day mortality were compared between the 2 groups. As internal validation, we performed a multi-institutional analysis of 20 patients (9 open [45%] vs. 11 robotic [55%]) undergoing RN with a level II thrombus. Patients were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, peri- and postoperative outcomes. Uni- and multivariable models were used adjusting for clinical and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups in both datasets. In the National Cancer Database, robotic approach was associated with 26% reduction in LOS (P < 0.001) but no difference in readmissions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.05, 4.50; P = 0.925) or 30-day mortality (OR = 2.72; 95% CI = 0.40, 10.86; P = 0.211). In multicenter database, open group had significantly greater blood loss (600 vs. 100.0 mL, P = 0.020). The rate of blood transfusion was higher in the open group, but was not significant (44.4% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.336). Robotic group had a shorter LOS (1 vs. 5 days; P = 0.026). No difference was seen between the open and robotic groups in terms of operative time (226 vs. 260 minutes, P = 0.922) and postoperative complications (P > 0.999). CONCLUSION: In select cases and experienced hands, robotic approach offers a reasonable alternative to open surgery without an increased complication rate.
Authors: Laura Horodyski; Javier Gonzalez; Marina M Tabbara; Jeffrey J Gaynor; Maria Rodriguez-Cabero; Felipe Herranz-Amo; Carlos Hernández; Rushi Shah; Gaetano Ciancio Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 5.738