Comparison of Perioperative, Renal Functional, and Oncological Outcomes Between Off-Clamp and On-Clamp Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Tumors: An Updated Evidence-Based Analysis

Off-clamp vs on-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare intra- and postoperative outcomes between off-clamp and on-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), using data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or covariate-matched studies (propensity score-matched or matched-pair analysis).

METHODS

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant literature review was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and CENTRAL for relevant studies comparing off-clamp to on-clamp RAPN. Primary outcomes were estimated blood loss, postoperative percentage decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and margin positive rate. Secondary outcomes were operative time, postoperative eGFR, length of stay, all postoperative complications, major complications, and need for transfusion. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to generate mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies (2307 patients) were shortlisted for analysis. There was no significant difference in estimated operative blood loss between off-clamp and on-clamp RAPN (MD 21.9 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.9 to 44.7 mL; P = 0.06, I2  = 58%). Off-clamp RAPN yielded a smaller postoperative eGFR deterioration (MD 3.10%, 95% CI 1.05-5.16%; P = 0.008, I2  = 13%) and lower odds of margin positivity (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.94; P = 0.03, I2  = 0%). No significant differences were found for all secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Off-clamp and on-clamp RAPN are similarly effective approaches for selected renal masses. Within the classic trifecta of PN outcomes, off-clamp RAPN yields similar rates of perioperative complications and may possibly offer better preservation of renal function and reduced margin-positive rates.

Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Versus Lenvatinib for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is often diagnosed in advanced stages. Following sorafenib, lenvatinib (LENV) has been approved as a first-line treatment option for unresectable HCC. In the past few years, at least 9 large-scale cohort studies have examined the efficacy and safety of LENV compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATE/BEV) in unresectable HCC, but there is currently no direct meta-analysis conducted for a comprehensive consolidation. To provide the most updated meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy and safety of ATE/BEV versus LENV for patients with unresectable HCC. Our studies comparing the efficacy and safety of ATE/BEV and LENV in unresectable HCC were systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to February 2023. Outcomes measured were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), mortality, complete response (CR), partial response (PR), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progressive disease (PD), stable disease (SD), and adverse events (AEs). Seven eligible studies involving 4428 patients (1569 in the ATE/BEV group and 2859 in the LENV group) were included in the narrative synthesis. All baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups except for Child-Pugh class B. Ultimately, our meta-analysis showed that the LENV group had longer OS and PFS than the ATE/BEV group. Moreover, patients on LENV were more likely to achieve SD, whereas those on ATE/BEV were more likely to achieve PR.

Partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: recommendations of the Italian Society of Urology RCC working group

INTRODUCTION

Partial nephrectomy (PN) aims to remove renal tumors while preserving renal function without affecting oncological and perioperative surgical outcomes. Aim of this paper is to summarize the current evidence on PN and to provide evidence-based recommendations on indications, surgical technique, perioperative management and postoperative surveillance of PN for renal tumors in the Italian clinical and health care system context.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This review is the result of an interactive peer-reviewing process of the recent literature on PN for renal tumors carried out by an expert panel composed of members of the Italian Society of Urology (SIU) Renal Cell Carcinoma Working Group.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

PN for localized renal tumors is not inferior to radical nephrectomy in terms of survival outcomes while significantly better preserving renal function. Loss of renal function after PN is influenced by medical comorbidities/preoperative renal function and surgical variables such volume of parenchyma preserved and ischemia time. Urologists should select the clamping strategy during PN based on their experience and patient-specific factors. PN can be performed with any surgical approach based on surgeon's expertise and skills. Robotic PN has the potential to expand the minimally invasive indications without interfering with oncological outcomes. The use of 3D virtual models, real time ultrasound and fluorescence tools to assess the anatomy and vascularization of renal tumors during PN may allow a more accurate preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance. Proper postoperative surveillance protocols are essential to detect tumor recurrences and assess functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

PN is the standard of care for treatment of localized T1 renal tumors. Recent data supports PN also for selected T2-T3a tumors in experienced institutions. Careful preoperative planning, adequate surgical skills and volumes and appropriate postoperative management and surveillance are paramount to optimize PN oncological and functional outcomes.

Balanced crystalloid solutions versus normal saline in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intravenous fluid therapy is important for pediatric and adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs). However, medical professionals continue to struggle to determine the most appropriate fluids to obtain the best possible outcomes for each patient.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a meta-analysis involving cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the influence of balanced crystalloid solutions and normal saline among patients in ICUs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Studies that compared balanced crystalloid solutions and saline in ICU patients from databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched up to July 25, 2022. The primary outcomes were mortality and renal-related outcomes, which included major adverse kidney events within 30 days (MAKE30), acute kidney injury (AKI), new receipt of renal replacement therapy (RRT), maximum creatinine increasing, maximum creatinine level, and final creatinine level ≥ 200% of baseline. Service utilization including length of hospital stay, ICU stay, ICU-free days and ventilator-free days were also reported.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies (10 RCTs and 3 cohort studies) involving 38,798 patients in ICUs met the selection criteria. Our analysis revealed that each subgroup had no significant difference in mortality outcomes among ICU patients between balanced crystalloid solutions and normal saline. A significant difference was detected between the adult groups (odds ratio [OR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], [0.86, 1.00]; p = 0.04) indicating that the AKI in the balanced crystalloid solutions group was lower than that in the normal saline group. Other renal-related outcomes, such as MAKE30, RRT, maximum creatinine increasing, maximum creatinine level, and final creatinine level ≥ 200% of baseline showed no significant difference between the two groups. Regarding secondary outcomes, the balanced crystalloid solution group had a longer ICU stay time (WMD, 0.02; 95% CI, [0.01, 0.03]; p = 0.0004 and I2 = 0%; p = 0.96) than the normal saline group among adult patients. Furthermore, children treated with balanced crystalloid solution had a shorter hospital stay time (WMD, - 1.10; 95% CI, [- 2.10, - 0.10]; p = 0.03 and I2 = 17%; p = 0.30) than those treated with saline.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with saline, balanced crystalloid solutions could not reduce the risk of mortality and renal-related outcomes, including MAKE30, RRT, maximum creatinine increasing, maximum creatinine level, and final creatinine level ≥ 200% of baseline, but the solutions may reduce total AKI incidence among adult patients in ICUs. For service utilization outcomes, balanced crystalloid solutions were associated with a longer length of ICU stay in the adult group and shorter length of hospital stay in the pediatric group.

Off-clamp Versus On-clamp Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Propensity-matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Partial nephrectomy is the preferred treatment option for the management of small renal masses. On-clamp partial nephrectomy is associated with a risk of ischemia and a greater loss of postoperative renal function, while the off-clamp procedure decreases the duration of renal ischemia, leading to better renal function preservation. However, the efficacy of the off- versus on-clamp partial nephrectomy for renal function preservation remains debatable.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative and functional outcomes following off- and on-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This study used the prospective multinational collaborative Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary objective of this study was the comparison of perioperative and functional outcomes between patients who underwent off- and on-clamp RAPN. Propensity scores were calculated for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), renal nephrometry score (RNS) and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of the 2114 patients, 210 had undergone off-clamp RAPN and others on-clamp procedure. Propensity matching was possible for 205 patients in a 1:1 ratio. After matching, the two groups were comparable for age, sex, BMI, tumor size, multifocality, tumor side, face of tumor, RNS, polar location of the tumor, surgical access, and preoperative hemoglobin, creatinine, and eGFR. There was no difference between the two groups for intraoperative (4.8% vs 5.3%, p = 0.823) and postoperative (11.2% vs 8.3%, p = 0.318) complications. Need for blood transfusion (2.9% vs 0, p = 0.030) and conversion to radical nephrectomy (10.2% vs 1%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the off-clamp group. At the last follow-up, there was no difference between the two groups for creatinine and eGFR. The mean fall in eGFR at the last follow-up compared with that at baseline was equivalent between the two groups (-16.0 vs -17.3 ml/min, p = 0.985).

CONCLUSIONS

Off-clamp RAPN does not result in better renal functional preservation. Alternatively, it may be associated with increased rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy and need for blood transfusion.

PATIENT SUMMARY

With this multicentric study, we noted that performing robotic partial nephrectomy without clamping the blood supply to the kidney is not associated with better preservation of renal function. However, off-clamp partial nephrectomy is associated with increased rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy and blood transfusion.

Perioperative, Functional, and Oncologic Outcomes of On-Clamp Versus Off-Clamp Partial Nephrectomy: An Updated Meta-analysis of 9027 Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the comparative efficacy and safety between on-clamp and off-clamp partial nephrectomy in patients with renal masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review was pre-registered on The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42022339127). PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. A manual search was also conducted to avoid missing relevant studies. All observational and experimental studies reporting the comparative efficacy and/or safety of on-clamp versus off-clamp partial nephrectomy were included. Outcomes were divided into 3 categories: perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the The Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and revised Cochrane ROB-II tool for nonrandomized and randomized studies, respectively. Fixed- and random-effect models were implemented to pool the mean difference and log odds ratio of continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine if the effect size was driven by a single study, and Egger's regression test was used to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies were meta-analyzed. The on-clamping method showed greater benefit when compared to the off-clamping technique in terms of perioperative (estimated blood loss and blood transfusion), functional (estimated glomerular filtration rate), and oncologic outcomes (tumor resection time). However, it is associated with higher risk for complications. Most studies were of moderate-to-serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

On-clamping shows superiority in terms of estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and tumor resection time. However, it is associated with increased risk of complications. The selection of the technique should be tailored per individual case based on their comorbidities and preoperative risk profile.