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

Abstract

ObjectiveTo 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).MethodsA 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).ResultsA 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.ConclusionsOff‐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.