Trifecta Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy Using the New Hugo™ RAS System Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy

(1) Background: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) is still performed in many referred urological institutions, representing a valid alternative to robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). We aimed to compare trifecta outcomes of LPN and RAPN with the Hugo™ RAS System. (2) Methods: Between October 2022 and September 2023, eighty-nine patients underwent minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (group A, RAPN = 27; group B, Laparoscopic PN = 62) for localized renal tumors at our Institution. Continuous variables were presented as median and IQR and compared by means of the Mann-Whitney U test, while categorical variables were presented as frequencies (%) and compared by means of the χ2 test. (3) Results: Group A showed a higher rate of male patients (81.5% vs. 59.7%, p = 0.04) and a higher trend towards larger clinical tumor size (34 vs. 29 mm, p = 0.14). All the other baseline variables were comparable between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Regarding post-operative data, group A displayed a lower operative time (92 vs. 149.5 min, p = 0.005) and a shorter hospital stay (3 vs. 5, p = 0.002). A higher rate of malignant pathology was evidenced in group A (77.8% vs. 58.1%, p = 0.07) as well as a lower trend towards positive surgical margins (3.7% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.82), even if not statistically significant. (4) Conclusions: The rate of trifecta achievement was 92.6% and 82.3% for group A and B (p = 0.10), respectively. In terms of trifecta outcomes, RAPN using the Hugo™ RAS System showed comparable results to LPN performed by the same experienced surgeon.

Impacts of Complete Endophytic Renal Tumors on Surgical, Functional, and Oncological Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy

Objective: Complete endophytic renal tumors (CERTs) are the most challenging for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). This study aimed to determine the impact of CERT on outcomes of RAPN. Methods: All RAPN cases for localized renal tumor undertaken at Yokohama City University Hospital between 2016 and 2023 were enrolled. Tumor characteristics and surgical, functional, and oncologic outcomes of RAPN were compared between CERT and non-CERT groups. Results: Consecutive 666 patients were enrolled, and 76 (11.4%) were identified as CERT (3 points of "E" score). CERT showed smaller tumor diameters (p < 0.001), more predominant hilar tumor (p = 0.029), higher "N" scores (p < 0.001) and "L" scores (p = 0.006) than non-CERT. The CERT group showed longer warm ischemia times (p < 0.001), more frequent positive surgical margins (p = 0.028), and relatively lower trifecta achievement rates (p = 0.101) than the non-CERT group. In multivariable analysis, the CERT was an independent predictor for trifecta achievement but not for pentafecta achievement. Conclusions: CERT was associated with longer warm ischemia time, positive surgical margin, and lower trifecta achievement, but not with surgical complication and pentafecta achievement in RAPN. This study suggested that CERT had limited influence on long-term renal functional preservation; however, it had strong impacts on short-term surgical outcome.

Predicting Peri-Operative Outcomes in Patients Treated with Percutaneous Thermal Ablation for Small Renal Masses: The SuNS Nephrometry Score

Our objective was to develop a new, simple, and ablation-specific nephrometry score to predict peri-operative outcomes and to compare its predictive accuracy to PADUA and RENAL scores. Overall, 418 patients were treated with percutaneous thermal ablation (microwave and radiofrequency) between 2008 and 2021. The outcome of interest was trifecta status (achieved vs. not achieved): incomplete ablation or Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications or postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate decrease ≥ 30%. First, we validated the discrimination ability of the PADUA and RENAL scoring systems. Second, we created and internally validated a novel scoring (SuNS) system, according to multivariable logistic regression models. The predictive accuracy of the model was tested in terms of discrimination and calibration. Overall, 89 (21%) patients did not achieve trifecta. PADUA and RENAL scores showed poor ability to predict trifecta status (c-indexes 0.60 [0.53-0.67] and 0.62 [0.55-0.69], respectively). We, therefore, developed the SuNS model (c-index: 0.74 [0.67-0.79]) based on: (1) contact surface area; (2) nearness to renal sinus or urinary collecting system; (3) tumour diameter. Three complexity classes were created: low (3-4 points; 11% of no trifecta) vs. moderate (5-6 points; 30% of no trifecta) vs. high (7-8 points; 65% of no trifecta) complexity. Limitations include the retrospective and single-institution nature of the study. In conclusion, we developed an immediate, simple, and reproducible ablation-specific nephrometry score (SuNS) that outperformed PADUA and RENAL nephrometry scores in predicting peri-operative outcomes. External validation is required before daily practice implementation.

Analysis of trifecta outcomes in a single center with robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for T1b renal tumors

INTRODUCTION

This study was performed to investigate the preoperative factors associated with difficulty achieving trifecta in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for clinical T1b renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

Among 187 patients who underwent robot-assisted partial nephrectomy at our hospital from March 2012 to February 2022, we retrospectively examined 30 patients with unilateral single clinical T1b renal cell carcinoma with at least 6 months of postoperative follow-up, excluding patients with hereditary disease. The following factors were examined in detail: patient-related factors, perioperative factors, surgical techniques, tumor factors, and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores. We examined the preoperative factors associated with difficulty achieving trifecta. A positive surgical margin was pathologically defined as the presence of tumor cells at the margin of the resected specimen or visually defined as intraoperative tumor incision or pseudocapsular damage.

RESULTS

Of the 30 patients in this study, 12 achieved trifecta and 18 did not. The reasons for not achieving trifecta were a warm ischemia time of >25 min (66.7%), positive surgical margin (23.3%), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (13.3%) (with overlapping factors). No patients had a pathologically positive surgical margin. Visually positive surgical margins were confirmed by the surgical records and surgical videos. Achieving trifecta was challenging in the multivariate analysis when the "L" component of the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score was ≥2 points.

CONCLUSION

A preoperative "L" component of ≥2 points in the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score was associated with difficulty achieving trifecta.

A trifecta: patterns in orgasm consistency, relational satisfaction, and sexual satisfaction

BACKGROUND

We based this study on the sexual wholeness model, which considers emotional, physical, and meaning elements of sexuality, and previous research that indicates variability in the associations among orgasm consistency, relational satisfaction, and sexual satisfaction.

AIM

We performed a person-based latent class approach to examine variables linked with the trifecta of orgasm consistency, relational satisfaction, and sexual satisfaction.

METHODS

We used a Mechanical Turk sample that consisted of 1645 sexually active participants (1032 women) to evaluate classes and related variables.

OUTCOMES

Women divided into 5 classes and men into 3 classes. High orgasm consistency alone did not ensure sexual or relational satisfaction.

RESULTS

We found that 5 groups emerged for women: high orgasm/low satisfaction (6%), low trifecta (8%), low orgasm/high satisfaction (16%), moderate orgasm/high satisfaction (15%), and high trifecta (55%). For men, 3 groups emerged: lower orgasm/high satisfaction (12%), moderate trifecta (14%), and high trifecta (74%). We also found that high orgasm consistency for women did not guarantee relational and sexual satisfaction, nor did lower orgasm consistency for men or women guarantee problematic relational and sexual satisfaction.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Communication, attachment, and sexual harmony were key elements associated with positive trifecta outcomes. Clinicians and educators may emphasize the importance of these variables when individuals encounter sexual or relational distress.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

Data analytic techniques revealed a variety of groups for men and women and associations between a host of physical, psychological, and meaning variables and the trifecta of orgasm consistency, relational satisfaction, and sexual satisfaction. However, this study is cross-sectional and correlational, which limits the conclusions that we can draw from it.

CONCLUSION

While the variables of orgasm consistency, relational satisfaction, and sexual satisfaction are each informative, together they help clinicians, educators, and researchers better understand the complexity of sex.

Validation of the Trifecta Scoring Metric in Vacuum-Assisted Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Single-Center Experience

Background: Scoring metrics to assess and compare outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) are needed. We aim to evaluate prevalence and predictors of trifecta in a cohort of patients treated with vacuum-assisted mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (vmPCNL) for kidney stones. Methods: Data from 287 participants who underwent vmPCNL were analysed. Patients’ and stones’ characteristics as well as operative data were collected. Stone-free was defined as no residual stones. The modified Clavien classification was used to score postoperative complications. Trifecta was defined as stone-free status without complications after a single session and no auxiliary procedures. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models tested the association between predictors and trifecta outcome. Results: After vmPCNL, 219 (76.3%) patients were stone-free, and 81 (28.2%) had postoperative complications (any Clavien). Of 287, 170 (59.2%) patients achieved trifecta criteria. Patients who achieved trifecta status had smaller stone volume (p < 0.001), a higher rate of single stones (p < 0.001), shorter operative time (p < 0.01), and a higher rate of single percutaneous tract (p < 0.01) than −trifecta patients. Trifecta status decreased with the number of calyces involved, being 77.1%, 18.8%, and 4.1% in patients with 1, 2, or 3 calyces with stones, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that stone volume (OR 1.1, p = 0.02) and multiple calyces being involved (OR 2.8 and OR 4.3 for two- and three-calyceal groups, respectively, all p < 0.01) were independent unfavourable risk factors for trifecta after accounting for age, BMI, gender, operative time, and number of access tracts. Conclusions: Trifecta status was achieved in 6 out of 10 patients after vmPCNL. Stone distribution in multiple calyceal groups and stone volume were independent unfavourable risk factors for trifecta.

The Impact of Postoperative Renal Function Recovery after Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma

Background and objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the association between warm ischemic time (WIT) and postoperative renal function using Trifecta achievement in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who underwent robotic (RAPN) or laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients with RCC who underwent RAPN (RAPN group) or LPN (LPN group) at three institutions in Japan between March 2012 and October 2021. The primary endpoints were the rate of trifecta achievement in both surgical techniques and the association between WIT and recovery of postoperative renal function surgical outcomes. Results: The rate of trifecta achievement was significantly lower in patients with LPN than in those with RAPN (p < 0.001). WIT ≥ 25 min were 18 patients (18%) in the RAPN group and 89 (52.7%) in the LPN group. The postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was almost the same. However, 13 patients (7.7%) had a decreased in eGFR ≥ 15% at 3 months after LPN compared with the preoperative eGFR. Conclusions: The rate of trifecta achievement in the RAPN group was significantly higher than that in the LPN group. However, eGFR was identified as relatively better preserved after PN in both groups.

Surgical Quality, Antihypertensive Therapy, and Electrolyte Balance: A Novel Trifecta to Assess Long-Term Outcomes of Adrenal Surgery for Unilateral Primary Aldosteronism

Background: To propose a trifecta that summarizes endpoints and predicts their maintenance after adrenalectomy (n = 90) for unilateral primary aldosteronism (UPA). Methods: Trifecta was defined as coexistence of: ≥50% antihypertensive therapeutic intensity score reduction (∆TIS), no hypokalemia at 3 months, and no Clavien grade 2–5. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of trifecta. Probability of clinical, biochemical, and simultaneous success according to trifecta were assessed by Kaplan–Meier. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of long-term clinical, biochemical, and simultaneous success. For all analyses, a two-sided p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Simultaneous success rate was 50%. On multivariable analysis, TIS was an independent predictor of trifecta achievement (HR 3.28; 95% CI 1.07–10.9; p = 0.03). At Kaplan–Meier, trifecta predicted higher success for all endpoints (each p < 0.03). On multivariable Cox analysis, adenoma size (AS) ≥6 cm and trifecta were independent predictors of biochemical (AS: HR 2.87; 95% CI 1.53–5.36; trifecta: HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.13–3.90; each p < 0.02) and simultaneous success (AS: HR 3.81; 95% CI 1.68–8.65; trifecta: HR 4.29; 95% CI 2.08–8.86; each p < 0.01), while trifecta was an independent predictor of complete clinical success (HR 2.84; 95% CI 1.45–5.58; p < 0.01). Conclusions: Trifecta and AS are independent predictors of either long-term complete clinical, biochemical, or combined success after adrenalectomy for UPA.

External Validation of a Novel Comprehensive Trifecta System in Predicting Oncologic and Functional Outcomes of Partial Nephrectomy: Results of a Multicentric Series

Background: To validate a novel trifecta for evaluating outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) on a multicentric dataset. Methods: Between 2007 and 2020, three renal cancer databases were queried for patients with solitary renal masses who underwent PN (n = 649). Trifecta was estimated for overall cohort and contributing centers. Overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) probabilities were assessed by Kaplan–Meier. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of OS, CSS, ESRD. For all analyses, a p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: At a median follow-up of 22.7 months (IQR 12.5–76.5) overall trifecta was 76.7% [Centre A; (n = 230; 68.6%), B (n = 68; 77.3%), C (n = 200; 88.4%); p = 0.001). On Kaplan–Meier, patients achieving trifecta exhibited higher OS (p = 0.024), higher CSS (p = 0.015) and lower ESRD rates (p = 0.024). On multivariable analysis, age (HR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01–1.08) and trifecta (HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.15–0.76) were independent predictors of OS while pT stage (HR 1.95; 95% CI 0.45–8.43) and trifecta (HR 0.33; 95% CI 0.16–0.67) were predictors of CSS (each p < 0.01). Preoperative CKD stage ≥ 3a (HR 13.1; 95% CI 4.07–42.6) and trifecta (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19–0.87) were independent predictors of ESRD (each p < 0.05). Conclusions: On external validation, trifecta was an independent predictor of all PN endpoints, regardless of hilar control and ischemia duration.

Comparison of Tumor Enucleation and Standard Partial Nephrectomy According to Trifecta Outcomes: A Multicenter Study by the Turkish Academy of Urology, Uro-Oncology Working Group

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to evaluate the impact of the resection technique (tumor enucleation (TE) or standard partial nephrectomy (SPN)) on trifecta outcomes in patients having undergone partial nephrectomy (PN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical and pathologic parameters in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma (pT1-2N0M0) who had undergone PN between January 2001-December 2018 at one of 15 different tertiary referral centers. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to investigate independent predictors of trifecta failure, decreased postoperative renal functions (decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) > 10%), perioperative complications (Clavien-Dindo > 1), and positive surgical margins.

RESULTS

A total of 1070 patients with a mean age 56.11 ± 11.88 years were included in our study. PN was performed with TE in 848 (79.25%) and SPN in 222 (20.75%) patients. Trifecta failure rate was 56.2% for TE and 64.4% for SPN (p = 0.028). On multivariable analysis, TE was associated with less trifecta failure (p = 0.025) and eGFR decrease >10% rates (p = 0.024). On the other hand, there was no statistically significant difference between TE and SPN according to positive surgical margins (p = 0.450) and complication > Clavien-Dindo grade 1 (p = 0.888) rates. The only independent predictive factor for complications > Clavien-Dindo 1 was the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TE is associated with less trifecta failure than SPN. This result is mainly due to better preservation of renal function with TE.

Trifecta versus perimount bioprosthesis for surgical aortic valve replacement; systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies suggested higher rates of early structural valve degeneration or reintervention for the Trifecta valve compared to other valves. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of the Trifecta valve and the Perimount valves in patients who underwent a surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

METHODS

All randomized control trials and observational studies which investigated the outcomes of the Trifecta valve and Perimount valves were identified with PubMed and EMBASE. The endpoints were the rates of reintervention and all-cause mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) for reintervention and all-cause mortality were combined with the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Our search identified 6 eligible observational studies which enrolled a total of 11,135 patients who underwent SAVR with either the Trifecta valve (n = 4932) or Perimount (n = 6203). Pooled analyses demonstrated that the reintervention rates were significantly higher with the Trifecta valve compared with Perimount valves (HR [95% confidence interval {CI}] = 3.16 [1.83-5.46]; p < .0001; I² = 40%). In contrast, all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the two groups (HR [95% CI] = 1.09 [0.75-1.58]; p = .32, I² = 12%).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis showed that AVR with the Trifecta valve was associated with higher rates of reintervention compared for that with the Perimount valve. Although further long-term randomized trials are warranted, surgeons need to be cautious when choosing a bioprosthetic valve for patients undergoing SAVR.

A comparison of DAP and RENAL scoring systems in the achievement of trifecta in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy

PURPOSE

The concept of 'trifecta' outcome postulated for radical prostatectomy has been adopted for partial nephrectomy, the gold standard for management of small renal masses. We sought to evaluate the role of nephrometry scores in predicting outcomes in terms of the trifecta. We compared two scoring systems for renal tumour complexity (RENAL and DAP) in the prediction of trifecta outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-nine patients who underwent laparoscopic PN (LPN) were evaluated in a single-centre retrospective study (2010-2017). RENAL and DAP scores were measured. Parameters relevant to the trifecta were tabulated.

RESULTS

When comparing the two scoring systems in terms of warm ischaemia time (WIT), the DAP score could predict with statistically significant accuracy the completion of resection within 25 mins of WIT. Tumours were more evenly distributed according to anatomical characteristics with the DAP scoring system than with the RENAL scoring system. When comparing these systems in terms of complications, neither predicted complications based on complexity with significant accuracy. A low RENAL score predicted trifecta achievement in three-fourth (71.4%) of patients, while a medium RENAL score predicted trifecta achievement in half (54%) of patients. DAP score predicted trifecta achievement in all tumours with a low score, two-third (66%) in medium and less than half (42%) with a high score. Predictions based on DAP were accurate and significantly so (p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

DAP score predicted the outcomes of LPN in terms of trifecta significantly better than the RENAL score. In our experience, the DAP score was able to distribute tumour complexity among its groups more effectively than the RENAL score. There is early evidence that the DAP score may be more useful than the RENAL score for decision-making in nephron sparing surgery. This is especially pertinent for small renal masses at the upper limits of tumour complexity for which minimally invasive techniques can be safely applied.

Comparative Outcomes and Predictive Assessment of Trifecta in Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy Cases with Renal Cell Carcinoma: A 10-Year Experience at Ramathibodi Hospital

Purpose

To compare perioperative and trifecta outcomes of open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RPN) in patients with small renal mass at Ramathibodi Hospital, and to determine predictive factors in connection with trifecta.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 141 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy by eight experienced surgeons from January 2009 to December 2018. Baseline preoperative characteristics, postoperative and trifecta outcomes of the three treatment modalities were compared and analyzed. Univariate analysis was performed to determine predictive factors for trifecta achievement.

Results

A total of 70 patients had complete data available. Eighteen OPN, 11 LPN and 41 RPN cases were identified and reviewed. All preoperative and perioperative parameters were similar, except for operative time, which was significantly shorter in the OPN group compared with those undergoing LPN and RPN (135 vs 189 and 225 min, respectively; p-value = 0.001). Of these 70 patients, 59 were deemed eligible for and included in trifecta analysis, which revealed similar trifecta outcomes (64.29%, 45.45%, and 64.71% in the OPN, LPN, and RPN groups, respectively; p-value = 0.388). Univariate analysis showed that length of hospital stay was a negative associated factor for trifecta achievement (p-value = 0.007, 95% CI = 0.619 (0.44–0.88)).

Conclusion

Although OPN displayed the shortest operative time, the trifecta achievement rate was not significantly different among the three groups. The sole parameter, which was negatively associated with trifecta outcome achievement, was the length of hospital stay.

Definition and Unfavorable Risk Factors of Trifecta in Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Objectives: In performing mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), we aimed at achieving the trifecta of stone-free status and no complications in a single treatment session. We analyzed our experience to determine negative predictors for achieving these three-fold goals. Patients and Methods: The data of all consecutive patients who underwent tubeless mini-PCNL between July 2015 and March 2020 in two hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. Stone-free was defined as no residual stones. Complications were recorded and graded according to modified Clavien classification. Patients were divided into two groups according to the outcome (trifecta and non-trifecta). Factors affecting the outcome were compared between both groups by using univariate and multivariate analyses to detect independent unfavorable risk factors. Results: The study included 944 patients with mean age 40.2 years (standard deviation: 13.6). The stone-free rate after one session of mini-PCNL was 90.7%. Auxiliary procedures were needed in 14 patients (1.5%). Complications were observed in 76 patients (8.1%). Trifecta was achieved in 792 patients (84%). Independent unfavorable risk factors in multivariate analysis were number of caliceal groups affected by the stones (relative risks were 1.95 to 2.27 and 5.7 for one, two, and three caliceal groups respectively) and number of percutaneous tracts (relative risk was 2.2). Stone size and complexity were not significant predictors of missing trifecta in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Mini-PCNL can achieve a high rate of trifecta (84%) for different stone sizes and complexities. Stones distribution in multiple caliceal groups and multiple tracts are the independent unfavorable risk factor.

Which Is the Best Predictor to Achieve Trifecta in Patients Undergoing Elective Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy with Global Hilar Clamping? Comparative Analysis in Patients with Clinical T1a and T1b Renal Tumors

Background: Partial nephrectomy (PN) is the standard of treatment in patients with cT1 renal tumors. Current guidelines recommend PN as a standard of treatment in patients with cT1 renal tumors. However, the commonly accepted criteria for which surgical outcomes are evaluated both functionally and oncologically are not yet clear. The aim of this study was to evaluate compounding factors that affect the operative and functional outcomes for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in patients with cT1 renal tumors. Methods: This study was registered at NCT04213157 for patients who underwent LPN with the diagnosis of clinical T1 renal tumors. Between November 2009 and August 2018, 292 patients were included in the study. The patients were allocated into two groups according to the tumor size: T1a (n = 215) and T1b (n = 77). Demographic features, clinical tumor characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. A negative surgical margin, warm ischemia time of <20 minutes, and no postoperative major complications were accepted to achieve the trifecta outcomes. Pentafecta was defined as trifecta criteria plus >90% preservation of baseline renal function (RF) and no stage upgrade of chronic kidney disease at 12 months after surgery. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors predicting trifecta and pentafecta. Results: Preoperative variables including age, gender, and baseline RF were similar between the two groups. The warm ischemia time was 13.4 vs 15.9 minutes (P = 0.001). The positive margin rate was 0.9% vs 2.6% (P = 0.284), and the major complication rate was 3.3% vs 2.6% (P = 0.548). The achievement of the trifecta rate was 88.4% vs 75.3% (P = 0.006) and pentafecta rate was 72.6% vs 42.9% (P = 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that tumor complexity, baseline RF, and diabetes mellitus are independent predictors of achieving pentafecta outcomes. Conclusion: LPN is an effective and reliable method for renal tumors even in T1b with satisfying surgical and functional outcomes.

Factors affecting renal function preservation among patients not achieving trifecta after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal masses

INTRODUCTION

The goal of partial nephrectomy for renal tumors is complete tumor removal with the preservation of renal function and no complications. Trifecta (total ischemia time < 25 minutes, negative surgical margins, and no surgical complications) is widely used to evaluate success after partial nephrectomy. We investigated factors affecting renal function preservation among patients not achieving trifecta after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients who underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal masses between December 2006 and March 2016 were examined. We defined preserved renal function as the preservation of an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 90% 1 year after surgery. We examined factors affecting renal function preservation among patients not achieving trifecta after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

RESULTS

Thirty out of 66 patients (45%) did not achieve trifecta. In an evaluation of 66 patients, a multivariate analysis identified tumor size (P = .04) as an independent predictor affecting the achievement of trifecta. Tumor size was significantly smaller in the trifecta achievement group (1.9 ± 0.1 cm) than in the non-achievement group (2.2 ± 0.6 cm) (P = .04). We found that renal function was preserved 1 year after surgery in 14 out of the 30 patients not achieving trifecta. In univariate analysis, age (P = .01) was significantly associated with affecting the preservation of renal function among these patients. Patients with preserved renal function were significantly younger (47.8 ± 2.5 years) than those without (58.5 ± 2.9 years) (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Renal function may be preserved in younger patients even if they do not achieve trifecta after partial nephrectomy for small renal masses.

Trifecta Outcomes in Renal Hilar Tumors: A Comparison Between Robotic and Open Partial Nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To report a comparative analysis of outcomes in patients who underwent excisions of renal hilar tumors using both open and robotic approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed robotic and open patients who underwent partial nephrectomy of renal hilar tumors between 2011 and 2016. "Trifecta" was defined as negative surgical margins, no complications, and a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) preservation of ≥90% at last follow-up. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to equilibrate treatment groups, minimize selection bias, and optimize inference on the basis of each patient's clinicodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred robotic and 64 open patients had sufficient data for IPTW. After weighting, there were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups (p < 0.05). On adjusted analyses, robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) achieved equivalent rates of trifecta to open surgery (21.1% vs 13.9%, respectively, p = 0.387). There were no differences between robotic and open cohorts for negative margin rates (72.8% vs 90.4%, p = 0.124), absence of complications (68.6% vs 75.2%, p = 0.587), or GFR ≥90% (39.4% vs 21.6%, p = 0.111). The robotic cohort had a shorter mean length of stay (3.8 vs 5.0 days, p = 0.012), and no difference in estimated blood loss (253.3 vs 357.1, p = 0.091) or operating time (199.8 vs 200.4, p = 0.961).

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis both open and RPN for hilar tumors were equally likely to achieve a low "trifecta" outcome with a shorter mean length of stay in the robotic cohort.

[Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy]

Currently, partial nephrectomy as a nephron-sparing surgery is the standard treatment method of malignant kidney tumors stage T1 in the absence of contraindications. Robotic system is an intuitively convenient platform for performing partial nephrectomy of various degrees of complexity. The technique of robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy continues to improve but is still not standardized. A description of surgical technique, results and complications of robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy are presented in the article.

Outcomes of robot-assisted simple enucleation of renal masses: A single European center experience

The aim of this study was to assess the ability of pre-and intraoperative parameters, to predict the risk of perioperative complications after robot-assisted laparoscopic simple enucleation (RASE) of renal masses, and to evaluate the rate of trifecta achievement of this approach stratifying the cohort according to the use of ischemia during the enucleation.From April 2009 to June 2016, 129 patients underwent RASE at our Institution. We stratified the procedures in 2 groups: clamping and clamp-less RASE. After RASE, all specimens were retrospectively reviewed to assess the surface-intermediate-base (SIB) scoring system. Patients were followed-up according to the European Association of Urology guidelines recommendations. All pre-, intra-, and postoperative outcomes were prospectively collected in a customized database and retrospectively analyzed.A total of 112 (86.8%) patients underwent a pure RASE and 17 (13.2%) had a hybrid according to SIB classification system. The mean age was 61.17 years. In 21 patients (16.3%), complications occurred, 13 (61.9%) were Clavien 1 and 2, while 8 were Clavien 3a and b complications. Statistical significant association with complications was found in patients with American Society of Anestesiology (ASA) score 3 (44.5%, P = .04), longer mean operative time (OT) 195 versus 161.36 minutes (P =.03), mean postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) 10.1 versus 11.8 (P <.001), and mean ΔHb 3.59 versus 2.18 (P <.001). In multivariate logistic regression, only longer OT and ΔHb were statistical significant predictive factors for complications. In sub-group analysis, clamp-less RASE was safe in terms of complications (14.1%), positive surgical margins (1.3%), and mid-term local recurrence (1.3%). Although in this approach there is higher EBL (P = .01), this had no impact on ΔHb (P = .28). A clamp-less approach was associated with a higher rate of SIB 0 (71.8% vs 51%, P = .02), higher trifecta achievement (84.6% vs 62.7%, P = .004), and better impact on serum creatinine (mean 0.83 vs 0.91, P = .01).RASE of renal tumors is a safe technique with very good postoperative outcomes. Complication rate is low and associated with ASA score >3, longer OT, and ΔHb. RASE is suitable for the clamp-less approach, which allows to perform easier the pure enucleation (SIB 0) and to obtain higher rates of trifecta outcomes.

Predictors of trifecta outcomes in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal masses

OBJECTIVES

To assess trifecta outcomes for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal masses.

METHODS

A total of 63 patients who underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal masses by a single surgeon between January 2007 and December 2012 were evaluated. Demographic and perioperative data were collected and statistically analyzed. We retrospectively evaluated trifecta outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyze predictors of trifecta outcomes. Trifecta outcomes were defined as the combination of total ischemia time <25 min, negative surgical margins and no surgical complications.

RESULTS

Of the 63 patients, 39 (62%) achieved trifecta. A total of 21 patients had total ischemia time ≥25 min, four patients had positive surgical margins and two patients had surgical complications. Tumor size (P < 0.001), distance from the urine collecting system or sinus (P < 0.001) and surgeon's learning curve (P < 0.01) were significantly different between the trifecta and no-trifecta group. Multivariate analysis showed tumor size and surgeon's learning curve to be independent predictors of trifecta outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor size and surgeon's learning curve seems to be strong predictors of trifecta outcomes after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in T1a renal masses.