Laparoscopic versus Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Tumors with Cystic Features: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Trifecta Achievement
Author:
Prata Francesco1ORCID, Iannuzzi Andrea1ORCID, Ricci Marco1ORCID, Liaci Francesca1, Tedesco Francesco1, Ragusa Alberto1ORCID, Civitella Angelo1, Pira Matteo1, Fantozzi Marco1, Sica Leonilde1, Scarpa Roberto Mario1ORCID, Papalia Rocco1ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
Abstract
Background: To compare perioperative outcomes and trifecta rates between laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomies (PN) using the Hugo™ RAS System, a study was conducted between October 2022 and September 2023. Methods: Twenty-two patients underwent minimally invasive PN for cystic renal tumors at our institution (group A: RAPN = 6; group B: Laparoscopic PN = 16). The trifecta was defined as the coexistence of negative surgical margin status, no Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications, and eGFR decline ≤ 30%. Continuous variables were presented as median and IQR and compared using the Mann–Whitney U test, while categorical variables were presented as frequencies (%) and compared using the χ2 test. For all statistical analysis, a two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: All patients successfully underwent off-clamp minimally invasive PN without the need for conversion or additional port placement. Group A showed a lower preoperative eGFR rate and a higher clinical tumor size, while group B displayed a higher number of male patients and bilateral lesions. However, these differences were not statistically significant (all p > 0.1). Regarding perioperative data, group A showed a lower operative time (79.5 vs. 134.5 min, p = 0.01), while group B showed a higher trend of benign histology (62.5% vs. 33.3%). All the other perioperative data were comparable between the two groups (all p > 0.2). The rate of trifecta achievement was 83.3% and 87.5% (p = 0.80) for group A and B, respectively. Conclusion: This study emphasizes the advantages of RAPN over laparoscopic procedures in terms of operative time. Extensive experience in Laparoscopic PN could be a key factor when approaching RAPN learning curve.
Reference37 articles.
1. Aveta, A., Iossa, V., Spena, G., Conforti, P., Pagano, G., Dinacci, F., Verze, P., Manfredi, C., Ferro, M., and Lasorsa, F. (2024). Ablative Treatments for Small Renal Masses and Management of Recurrences: A Comprehensive Review. Life, 14. 2. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2022 Update;Ljungberg;Eur. Urol.,2022 3. Brassetti, A., Cacciamani, G.E., Mari, A., Garisto, J.D., Bertolo, R., Sundaram, C.P., Derweesh, I., Bindayi, A., Dasgupta, P., and Porter, J. (2022). On-Clamp vs. Off-Clamp Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for CT2 Renal Tumors: Retrospective Propensity-Score-Matched Multicenter Outcome Analysis. Cancers, 14. 4. Triggers for Delayed Intervention in Patients with Small Renal Masses Undergoing Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review;Campi;Minerva Urol. E Nefrol. = Ital. J. Urol. Nephrol.,2020 5. Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Decline at 1 Year After Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy: A Multimodel Comparison of Predictors;Crocerossa;Eur. Urol. Open Sci.,2022
|
|