Robot-assisted approach improves surgical outcomes in obese patients undergoing partial nephrectomy

Retroperitoneal single port vs. transperitoneal multiport robot assisted partial nephrectomy in patients with highly hostile abdomen: comparative analysis from a tertiary care center

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to explore perioperative and functional outcomes in a cohort of patients with highly hostile abdomens treated with retroperitoneal (RP) single port vs transperitoneal multiport robot assisted partial nephrectomy.

METHODS

Clinical and surgical data of all consecutive patients treated with transperitoneal multiport and RP single-port robot assisted partial nephrectomy between March 2019 and January 2024 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. The presence of "hostile abdomen" was defined as personal history of at least one major abdominal surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess independent predictors of Trifecta achievement.

RESULTS

Overall, clinical and surgical data of 247 consecutive patients were prospectively collected, of these 71 met the inclusions criteria and were retrospectively analyzed. No differences emerged in baseline features. Previous surgery proximity to the site of partial nephrectomy was found comparable among groups (P=0.21). RP single port group showed a significantly lower operative time (171 vs. 235 min, P=0.02) and estimated blood loss (70 vs. 100 cc, P=0.04) while open conversion was significantly higher (9.3%) in case of multiport treatment (P=0.001). A significative lower rate of major postoperative complications (7.1% vs. 16.3%, P=0.03) as well as 90-days readmissions (P=0.04) was found in case of single port RP procedures. Adjusting for age, BMI and CCI, RP single port approach was confirmed as independent predictor of Trifecta achievement (OR 1.62 CI 1.18-2.35 P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with RAPN with highly hostile abdomens, the adoption of a single port RP approach reduces the major complication rate as compared to the multiport transperitoneal approach also improving EBL, operative time, LOS and pain management.

Comparing the outcomes of robotic vs. open partial nephrectomy in obese patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review

This meta-analysis examines and compares the perioperative results (such as complications, recovery, and other surgical outcomes) in obese patients who undergo either robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) or open partial nephrectomy (OPN). Essentially, the study is looking at how these two types of surgeries perform in obese patients, specifically focusing on outcomes related to the surgery process itself. We conducted a comprehensive search of major databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, focusing on English studies, up to November 2024. Review articles, research protocols without published data, conference abstracts, and irrelevant studies were excluded. We performed data analysis using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method and random-effects models, followed by mean differences, inverse variance, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The results were presented as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs, and data with p values less than 0.05 were identified. This meta-analysis included three cohort studies with a total of 604 patients. Compared to OPN, RPN was associated with significantly shorter hospital stays (WMD  - 2.27, 95% CI  - 3.67 to  - 0.87; p = 0.002), lower overall complication rates (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.73; p = 0.0004), and reduced estimated blood loss (WMD  - 125.12, 95% CI  - 198.02 to  - 52.22; p = 0.0008). No significant differences were found between the two groups in transfusion rates, major complications, renal ischemia times, or operative times. RPN offers a safe and feasible option for obese patients compared to OPN, with advantages such as shorter hospital stays, reduced blood loss, and fewer overall complications.

Robotic versus open mini-incision living donor nephrectomy: Single centre experience

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery is associated with less tissue manipulation and earlier recovery with minimal incision. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted donor nephrectomy (RDN) and open mini-incision donor nephrectomy (ODN).

METHODS

From 2016 to 2019, 141 cases involving RDN were analysed. Patient outcomes were compared with those of 191 patients who underwent ODN from 2010 to 2015. Demographics, operation factors, perioperative outcomes, and complications were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The RDN group presented with less blood loss than the ODN group (p = 0.023). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RDN group than in the ODN group (p < 0.005). The overall rate of complications was low and there was no significant difference in complication rates between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The robotic approach has benefits over the traditional open approach, including shorter length of hospital stay and reduced intraoperative blood loss.

Open versus robotic partial nephrectomy in obese patients: a multi-institutional propensity score-matched analysis (UroCCR 43-Robese study)

INTRODUCTION

There is limited evidence on the outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). In this study, we aimed to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of RPN and OPN.

METHODS

We relied on data from patients who underwent PN from 2009 to 2017 at 16 departments of urology participating in the UroCCR network, which were collected prospectively. In an effort to adjust for potential confounders, a propensity-score matching was performed. Perioperative outcomes were compared between OPN and RPN patients. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Overall, 1277 obese patients (932 robotic and 345 open were included. After propensity score matching, 166 OPN and 166 RPN individuals were considered for the study purposes; no statistically significant difference among baseline demographic or tumor-specific characteristics was present. A higher overall complication rate and major complications rate were recorded in the OPN group (37 vs. 25%, p = 0.01 and 21 vs. 10%, p = 0.007; respectively). The length of stay was also significantly longer in the OPN group, before and after propensity-score matching (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in Warm ischemia time (p = 0.66), absolute change in eGFR (p = 0.45) and positive surgical margins (p = 0.12). At a median postoperative follow-up period of 24 (8-40) months, DFS and OS were similar in the two groups (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, RPN was associated with better perioperative outcomes (improvement of major complications rate and LOS) than OPN. The oncological outcomes were found to be similar between the two approaches.

Surgical Approach for Partial Nephrectomy in the Management of Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: A variety of surgical and nonsurgical management options for small renal masses (SRMs) now exist. Surgery in the form of partial nephrectomy (PN) has three different approaches. It is unclear which PN approach, if any, offers superior clinical outcomes. Aim: The aim of this study is to compare outcomes in patients with SRMs <4 cm undergoing PN through the open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), or robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) approach and to establish the advantages and disadvantages of the various approaches. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing at least two of the above techniques. Eighteen studies and 17,013 patients were included in our study. A network meta-analysis with a frequentist framework was performed. OPN was used as the baseline comparator. The prespecified primary outcome was R0 resection rates. Secondary outcomes included operating time, ischemia time, blood loss, transfusion rates, urine leak rates, significant morbidity, length of stay, and recurrence. Results: There was no significant difference between the techniques in terms of R0 rates, tumor recurrence, urine leak rates, renal function, and >3a Clavien-Dindo complications. LPN had a longer ischemic time and operating time. OPN had a longer length of stay and higher average intraoperative blood loss. RPN had lower blood transfusion rates. Discussion: All approaches are acceptable from an oncological perspective. The minimally invasive approaches (i.e., RPN and LPN) offer advantages in terms of morbidity; however, LPN may increase ischemic time and operative duration. Variations between perioperative outcomes may influence the choice of approach on a case-by-case and institutional basis.

How far has robot-assisted partial nephrectomy reached?

Nephron-sparing surgery is the standard treatment for small renal mass (SRM). Nephron-sparing surgery has evolved from an open to a minimally invasive technique. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is the latest technique in this field and is reported to be safe and feasible, showing oncologically and functionally superior or compatible results compared with open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for SRM. This is not limited to only SRM but also applies to large and complex renal masses and other challenging situations. RAPN showed good oncological and functional outcomes for ≥clinical T2 renal tumors, complex renal masses (PADUA score ≥10, RENAL score ≥10), hilar renal tumors, and multiple renal tumors. In addition, the outcomes of RAPN in these challenging cases were not inferior to those in conventional cases. RAPN could also be applied to a number of challenging cases in which the open technique was considered first. RAPN showed good results in patients with a solitary kidney, horseshoe kidney, and in repeat surgeries. Furthermore, RAPN could be safely performed on obese, elderly, and pediatric patients. Finally, this review evaluates efficiency and utility of RAPN based on the results of challenging cases of renal masses and to project the future of RAPN.

Transperitoneal Versus Retroperitoneal Robotic-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy in Patients with Obesity

Introduction: We aim to compare transperitoneal (TP) and retroperitoneal (RP) robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) in obese patients. Obesity and RP fat can complicate RPN, especially in the RP approach where working space is limited. Materials and Methods: Using a multi-institutional database, we analyzed 468 obese patients undergoing RPN for a renal mass (86 [18.38%] RP, 382 [81.62%] TP). Obesity was defined as body mass index ≥30 kg/m2*. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed adjusting for age, previous abdominal surgery, tumor size, R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score, tumor location, surgical date, and participating centers. Baseline characteristics and perioperative and postoperative data were compared. Results: In the propensity score-matched cohort, 79 (50%) TP patients were matched with 79 (50%) RP patients. The RP group had more posterior tumors (67 [84.81%], RP versus 23 [29.11%], TP; P < .001), while the other baseline characteristics were comparable. Warm ischemia time (interquartile range; 15 [10, 12], RP versus 14 [10, 17] minutes, TP; P = .216), operative time (129 [116, 165], RP versus 130 [95, 180] minutes, TP; P = .687), estimated blood loss (50 [50, 100], RP versus 75 [50, 150] mL, TP; P = .129), length of stay (1 [1, 1], RP versus 1 [1, 2] day, TP; P = .319), and major complication rate (1 [1.27%], RP versus 3 [3.80%], TP; P = .620) were similar. No significant difference was observed in positive surgical margin rate and delta estimated glomerular filtration at follow-up. Conclusion: TP and RP RPN yielded similar perioperative and postoperative outcomes in obese patients. Obesity should not be a factor in determining optimal approach for RPN.

Percutaneous thermal ablation for cT1 renal mass in solitary kidney: A multicenter trifecta comparative analysis versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

INTRODUCTION

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in solitary kidney (SK) represents a challenging scenario. We sought to compare outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) versus percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) in SK patients with renal tumors cT1.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis of SK patients treated for RCC. The PTA group included cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation. We collected baseline characteristics, intraoperative, pathological, and post-operative data. We applied an arbitrary composite "trifecta" to assess surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes, only for malignant histology. RFS analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of "trifecta" achievement.

RESULTS

We included 198 SK patients (RAPN, n = 50; PTA n = 119). Mean clinical tumor size was not significantly different while R.E.N.A.L. score was higher for RAPN (p < 0.001). No differences in intra and major post-procedural complications. Recurrence rate was higher in PTA group but not statistically significant (p < 0.328). No difference in metastasis rate was found (p = 0.435). RFS was 96.1% in RAPN and 86.8% in PTA cohort (p = 0.003) while no difference in PFS was detected (p = 0.1). Trifecta was achieved in 72.5% of RAPN vs 77.3% of PTA (p = 0.481). Multivariable analysis has not detected predictors for Trifecta achievement.

CONCLUSION

PTA offers good outcomes in the management of SK patients with RCC. Compared with RAPN, it might carry a higher risk of recurrence; on the other hand, re-treatment is possible. Overall, PTA can be safely offered to treat SK patients presenting RCC. In general, it should be preferred in more frail patients to minimize the risk of complications.

Short-Term and Long-Term Renal Outcomes in Patients With Obesity After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Partial Nephrectomy for the Treatment of Renal Cancer: Retrospective Study

Background

Obesity is significantly associated with renal cell carcinoma. Surgery is the preferred treatment for demarcated lesions of renal cell carcinoma; however, obesity increases the complexity of surgical outcomes. Minimally invasive surgical techniques are preferred over open partial nephrectomy (OPN), but controversy remains regarding the most efficacious technique in patients with obesity.

Objective

This study aims to determine whether minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) or OPN better preserves renal function and investigate short- and long-term renal outcomes in patients with obesity undergoing a partial nephrectomy.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective chart review of 242 adult patients aged ≥18 years who underwent MIPN or OPN between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2016, at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. Using creatinine as a measure of kidney function, patients’ preoperative levels were compared with their postoperative levels in 2-time frames: short (3-6 months postsurgery) or long (>6 months). The primary outcome was the change in creatinine values from preoperative to >6 months postoperatively in patients with obesity. Secondary outcomes included the change in creatinine values from preoperative to 3 to 6 months postoperatively in patients with obesity who underwent MIPN versus OPN. We also analyzed the creatinine values of nonobese patients (BMI <30) who underwent partial nephrectomy using the same time frames. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate crude and multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI to observe associations between surgery type and changes in creatinine values from while stratifying for obesity.

Results

A total of 140 patients were included in the study, of whom 75 were obese and 65 were nonobese. At >6 months after MIPN (n=20), the odds of patients with obesity having a decrease or no change in creatinine values was 1.24 times higher than those who had OPN (n=13; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.299-6.729; P=.80). At 3 to 6 months after MIPN (n=27), the odds were 0.62 times lower than those after OPN (n=17; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.140-2.753; P=.56). In the nonobese group, at 3 to 6 months after undergoing minimally invasive surgery (n=18), the odds of having a decrease or no change in creatinine values was 4.86 times higher than those who had open surgery (n=21; OR 4.86, 95% CI 1.085-21.809; P=.04). At more than 6 months after MIPN (n=14), the odds were 4.13 times higher than those after OPN (n=11; OR 4.13, 95% CI 0.579-29.485; P=.16).

Conclusions

We observed a nonstatistically significant preservation of renal function in patients with obesity who underwent OPN at 3 to 6 months postoperatively. Conversely, after 6 months, the same was true for MIPN, indicating the long-term benefit of MIPN. In the nonobese group, MIPN was favored over OPN. 

Partial nephrectomy in frail patients: Benefits of robot-assisted surgery

BACKGROUND

To compare the effect of robot-assisted (RAPN) vs. open (OPN) partial nephrectomy on short-term postoperative outcomes and total hospital charges in frail patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

Within the National Inpatient Sample database we identified 2745 RCC patients treated with either RAPN or OPN between 2008 and 2015, who met the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups frailty-defining indicator criteria. We examined the rates of RAPN vs. OPN over time. Moreover, we compared the effect of RAPN vs. OPN on short-term postoperative outcomes and total hospital charges. Time trends and multivariable logistic, Poisson and linear regression models were applied.

RESULTS

Overall, 1109 (40.4%) frail patients were treated with RAPN. Rates of RAPN increased over time, from 16.3% to 54.7% (p < 0.001). Frail RAPN patients exhibited lower rates (all p < 0.001) of overall complications (35.3 vs. 48.3%), major complications (12.4 vs. 20.4%), blood transfusions (8.0 vs. 13.5%), non-home-based discharge (9.6 vs. 15.2%), shorter length of stay (3 vs. 4 days), but higher total hospital charges ($50,060 vs. $45,699). Moreover, RAPN independently predicted (all p < 0.001) lower risk of overall complications (OR: 0.58), major complications (OR: 0.55), blood transfusions (OR: 0.60) and non-home-based discharge (OR: 0.51), as well as shorter LOS (RR: 0.77) but also higher total hospital charges (RR: +$7682), relative to OPN.

CONCLUSIONS

In frail patients, RAPN is associated with lower rates of short-term postoperative complications, blood transfusions and non-home-based discharge, as well as with shorter LOS than OPN. However, RAPN use also results in higher total hospital charges.

Contemporary Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality Rates of Minimally Invasive vs Open Partial Nephrectomy in Obese Patients with Kidney Cancer

Aims: To compare early postoperative morbidity and mortality rates in obese patients (body mass index ≥30 kg/m²) who underwent minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) vs open partial nephrectomy (OPN), utilizing the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Materials and Methods: The NSQIP database was queried to identify obese patients who underwent either MIPN or OPN between 2008 and 2016. Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative time (OT), length of stay (LOS), and 30-day postoperative complications, readmissions, and mortality rates were recorded and compared between the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the adjusted odds of early postoperative complications in MIPN vs OPN. Results: A total of 6041 obese MIPN patients and 3064 obese OPN patients were identified. Mean OT (minutes ± standard deviation) was longer for MIPN vs OPN (197.2 ± 71.0 vs 189.6 ± 82.4, p < 0.001), while mean LOS (3.8 ± 2.8 days vs 5.8 ± 3.5 days, p < 0.001) and 30-day complications (8.5% vs 19.8%, p < 0.001) were lower. No difference in 30-day postoperative mortality rates between MIPN (0.4%) and OPN (0.5%) was observed (p = 0.426). In the adjusted analysis, the odds of any complication within 30 days in the MIPN group were 61% lower, blood transfusion 73% lower, pneumonia 38% lower, sepsis 70% lower, acute renal failure 64% lower, superficial surgical site infection 40% lower, and reoperation 47% lower, compared with OPN patients. Conclusions: When compared with OPN in obese patients, the likelihood of 30-day postoperative morbidity was significantly lower in MIPN patients. However, the odds of 30-day mortality rates were similar between the groups.

Open versus robotic partial nephrectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary studies

OBJECTIVES

To compare perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RaPN) with open partial nephrectomy (OPN).

METHODS

Systematically search through PubMed, Embase, ClinicalKey, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for eligible studies was performed to April 11, 2018. A meta-analysis was conducted for studies comparing RaPN and OPN. Confounding variables were assessed by meta-regression or subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

This study included 34 studies with 60 808 patients. Meta-analysis revealed less blood loss, less transfusion, longer operative time, less postoperative complications, lower readmission rate, shorter length of stay, and less estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline in RaPN groups. The superiority of RaPN in blood loss was attenuated with highly complex renal masses. The superiority of RaPN in intraoperative complications was strengthened with renal hilar control. The advantage of RaPN in surgical margin was increased in patient with body mass index (BMI) < 28.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with OPN, RaPN provided lower morbidities and better renal function preservation.

Complications in robotic urological surgeries and how to avoid them: A systematic review

Objectives

To review the main complications related to the robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) approach in urology and to suggest measures to avoid such issues.

Methods

A systematic search for articles of the contemporary literature was performed in PubMed database for complications in RAL urological procedures focused on positioning, access, and operative technique considerations. Each complication topic is followed by recommendations about how to avoid it.

Results

In all, 40 of 253 articles were included in this analysis. Several complications in RAL procedures can be avoided if the surgical team follows some key steps. Adequate patient positioning must avoid skin, peripheral nerve, and muscles injuries, and ocular and cognitive complications mainly related to steep Trendelenburg positioning in pelvic procedures. Port-site access and closure should not be neglected during minimally invasive procedures as these complications although rare can be troublesome. Technique-related complications depend on surgeon experience and the early learning curve should be monitored.

Conclusions

Adequate patient selection, surgical positioning, mentorship training, and avoiding long-lasting procedures are essential to prevent RAL-related complications. The robotic surgical team must be careful and work together to avoid possible complications. This review offers several steps in surgical planning to reach this goal.