BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopic tumor enucleation (RAE) for the treatment of renal hilar tumors and to describe our experience with renorrhaphy-related surgical techniques. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from 173 consecutive patients who underwent RAE for localized renal tumors (cT1-cT2N0M0) at our hospital between September 2014 and November 2019. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients had renal hilar tumors and 98 patients had nonhilar tumors. There were no statistical differences between the hilar and nonhilar groups in operation time (190 [115-390] vs. 190 [110-390] min, p = 0.889), warm ischemia time (26 [12-60] vs. 27 [17-41] min, p = 0.257), hospital stay duration (8 [3-16] vs. 7.5 [4-18] days, p = 0.386), renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 102.5 [29.4-144] vs. 101.3 [64.2-134.7] ml/min/1.73 m2 , p = 0.631); creatinine level, (76 [43-169] vs. 78.5 [50-281.3] µmol/L, p = 0.673), perioperative complications rate, or surgical margin status. However, patients with hilar tumors lost significantly more blood than did those with nonhilar tumors (250 [50-1500] vs. 200 [20-1200] ml, p = 0.007). During the follow-up period (median, 30 months), three patients in each group experienced recurrence. The 5-year recurrence-free rates were 93.0% and 95.4% in the hilar and nonhilar tumor groups, respectively (p = 0.640). CONCLUSIONS: For experienced robot laparoscopists, RAE is a safe, effective, and feasible procedure for renal hilar tumors, without increased risk of positive surgical margins or worse midterm oncologic outcomes compared with nonhilar tumors.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopic tumor enucleation (RAE) for the treatment of renal hilar tumors and to describe our experience with renorrhaphy-related surgical techniques. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from 173 consecutive patients who underwent RAE for localized renal tumors (cT1-cT2N0M0) at our hospital between September 2014 and November 2019. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients had renal hilar tumors and 98 patients had nonhilar tumors. There were no statistical differences between the hilar and nonhilar groups in operation time (190 [115-390] vs. 190 [110-390] min, p = 0.889), warm ischemia time (26 [12-60] vs. 27 [17-41] min, p = 0.257), hospital stay duration (8 [3-16] vs. 7.5 [4-18] days, p = 0.386), renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 102.5 [29.4-144] vs. 101.3 [64.2-134.7] ml/min/1.73 m2 , p = 0.631); creatinine level, (76 [43-169] vs. 78.5 [50-281.3] µmol/L, p = 0.673), perioperative complications rate, or surgical margin status. However, patients with hilar tumors lost significantly more blood than did those with nonhilar tumors (250 [50-1500] vs. 200 [20-1200] ml, p = 0.007). During the follow-up period (median, 30 months), three patients in each group experienced recurrence. The 5-year recurrence-free rates were 93.0% and 95.4% in the hilar and nonhilar tumor groups, respectively (p = 0.640). CONCLUSIONS: For experienced robot laparoscopists, RAE is a safe, effective, and feasible procedure for renal hilar tumors, without increased risk of positive surgical margins or worse midterm oncologic outcomes compared with nonhilar tumors.