Elimination of surgical drains following robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy

Urine leak and vascular complications following robotic partial nephrectomy: a contemporary single-center experience

Urine leak (UL) and vascular complications (VC), i.e., pseudoaneurysms and arteriovenous fistulas are well-described complications of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Historically, UL incidence ranges from 0.3 to 17% and VC from 0.8 to 5.6%. We report the contemporary experience of UL and VC from a single, high-volume center in cases of RAPN. 447 patients were identified from an IRB-approved Renal Tumor Database of 2174 cases who underwent RAPN from 1/2017 to 5/2023. VC occurred in 9 cases (4 pseudoaneurysms, 1 AV fistula, 4 concurrent AV fistula/pseudoaneurysm), UL occurred in 9 (2.0%), and there was one concurrent case of VC and UL. Collecting-system entry occurred in five VC cases and five UL cases. For VCs, the median nephrometry score and maximal tumor diameter was 8 (IQR 3.0) and 3.8 (0.9) cm, respectively, and 8 (3.0) and 3.7 (1.1) cm for UL cases, respectively. Most complications occurred with tumors ≤ 4 mm from the collecting system (n = 7 VC, n = 6 UL). VCs presented after 18 (6.0) days, 6 with gross hematuria; 3 required clot irrigation, 1 required continuous bladder irrigation, and 8 required embolization. No patients required postoperative transfusion. Patients with UL presented after a median of 1 (12) day, with 5 cases detected by elevated creatinine in drain fluid and the remainder detected on routine ultrasound. The duration of UL was 13 (41) days with only 2 cases requiring stenting and one case requiring a drainage catheter. No patients required kidney re-operation or removal. Our rate of VC and UL following RAPN are low and consistent with other contemporary series. Complications occurred in patients with high nephrometry scores or tumors located close to the collecting system. Both complications generally present early and can be managed without kidney re-operation or removal.

Assessing the perioperative outcomes of abdominal drain omission after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement (vs. omission) on perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), focusing on complications, time to canalization, deambulation, and pain management. A prospectively-maintained institutional database was queried to get data of patients who underwent RAPN for renal masses between January 2018 and May 2023 at our Institution. Baseline, surgical, and postoperative data were collected. Retrieved patients were stratified based upon placement of abdominal drain (Y/N). Descriptive analyses comparing the two groups were conducted as appropriate.77 After adjusting for potential confounders, a logistic regression analysis was conducted to evaluate significant predictors of any grade and "major" complications. 342 patients were included: 192 patients in the "drain group" versus 150 patients in the "no-drain" group. Renal masses were larger (p < 0.001) and at higher complexity (RENAL score, p = 0.01), in the drain group. Procedures in the drain group had statistically significantly longer operative time, ischemia time, and higher blood loss (all p-values < 0.001). The urinary collecting system was more likely involved compared to the no-drain group (p = 0.01). At multivariate analysis, abdominal drainage was not a significant predictor of any grade (OR 0.79, 95%CI 0.33-1.87) and major postoperative complications (OR 3.62, 95%CI 0.53-9.68). Patients in the drain group experienced a statistically significantly higher hemoglobin drop (p < 0.01). Moreover, they exhibited statistically significant higher paracetamol consumption (p < 0.001) and need for additional opioids (p = 0.02). In summary, the study results suggest the safety of omitting drain placement and remark on the need for personalized decision-making, which considers patient and procedural factors.

Pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy without routine drainage does not increase postoperative morbidity

Purpose

We aimed to define the feasibility of the omission of routine insertion of a drain after pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (PLDN). We compared the outcomes between those with and without routine drain insertion.

Materials and Methods

From July 2014 to October 2018, 178 PLDN were consecutively performed by a single surgeon. Since October 2016, we stopped routine insertion of a drain after PLDN. Thus, the former 80 drained routinely were defined as the Drainage group and the latter 98 were defined as the Non-drainage group. One patient drained non-routinely in the Non-drainage group was excluded from the final analysis. Operative and convalescence parameters and intra- and postoperative complications were compared between the groups. Intra- and postoperative complications within 90 days of surgery were graded using the Satava and Clavien–Dindo classifications, respectively.

Results

Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, except for concomitant surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and preoperative glomerular filtration rate. All operative and convalescence parameters were similar between the groups, except for postoperative glomerular filtration rate. The rates of overall intra- (22.5% versus 28.9%, p=0.337) and postoperative (62.5% versus 59.8%, p=0.713) complications were similar between the groups. The rates of potentially drain-related postoperative complications were also similar between the groups (36.3% versus 33.0%, p=0.650). Two patients per group suffered from major drain-related complications (2.5% versus 2.1%).

Conclusions

PLDN without routine drainage can be performed safely without an increase in postoperative morbidity.

Should a Drain Be Routinely Required After Transperitoneal Robotic Partial Nephrectomy?

Introduction: Closed drains have traditionally been placed after partial nephrectomy because of risks of bleeding and urine leak. We sought to study the safety of a nonroutine drain (NRD) approach after transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN). Patients and Methods: From a multi-institutional database, we have analyzed the data of 904 patients who underwent RPN. Five hundred forty-six (60.40%) patients underwent RPN by a surgeon who routinely placed drains. Three hundred fifty-eight (39.60%) patients underwent RPN by a surgeon who did not routinely placed drains. Perioperative outcomes, length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates were compared between the two groups. Baseline characteristics, perioperative, and postoperative outcomes were compared using Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test. Results: Patients in the NRD group were more likely to have higher body mass index (30.10 kg/m² vs 28.07 kg/m²; P < 0.001), higher tumor size (3.0 cm vs 2.5 cm; P = 0.001), and higher renal score (8 vs 7; P < 0.001). Rate of transfusion (0.00% NRD vs 0.56% RD; P = 0.157) and overall complication (7.33% NRD vs 7.82% RD; P = 0.782) were comparable. Median hospital stay is 1 day for both groups. Readmission rate was also similar (0.55% NRD vs 1.40% RD; P = 0.279). In a multivariable analysis, NRD approach was associated with shorter length of hospital stay (incidence rate ratio [IRR] - 0.72, P < 0.001). Conclusion: An NRD approach for RPN yielded a decreased LOS and similar perioperative outcomes. Placement of surgical drains should be based on individual circumstances, and not required on a routine basis.