Robot-assisted versus open partial nephrectomy: comparison of outcomes. A systematic review.
Journal
Minerva urologica e nefrologica = The Italian journal of urology and nephrology
ISSN: 1827-1758
Titre abrégé: Minerva Urol Nefrol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 8503649
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
22
3
2019
medline:
21
8
2019
entrez:
22
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is increasingly used for the surgical management of renal masses. Aim of this study was to analyze the available literature regarding the outcomes of RAPN compared to those of open partial nephrectomy (OPN). A literature search was performed up to October 2018 using PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase. Article selection followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) principles and Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes (PICO) methodology was used. Population (P) was patients with renal masses who underwent RAPN (I). RAPN was compared with OPN (C). Outcomes of interest were perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes of both surgical procedures (O). Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled studies andobservational cohort studies comparing RAPN versus OPN, which reported at least one outcome of interest. Twenty-two manuscripts met our inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. RAPN was superior to OPN in terms of complication rate in 11 studies while similar results were observed in 9 studies. Positive surgical margins were similar in 13 studies while RAPN had lower surgical margins in 6 studies. Operative and warm ischemia times were longer in OPN in 13 and 10 studies, respectively. Seventeen and 19 studies showed that estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay were higher in RAPN. Estimated glomerular filtration rate decline and chronic kidney disease upstaging decline were similar in the majority of studies. Current evidence demonstrate that RAPN is a reasonable alternative to OPN with regard to oncological and early functional outcomes with a straightforward advantage of improved perioperative morbidity, as expected by minimally invasive techniques. Nevertheless, there is still a great need for well-designed randomized studies with an extended follow-up.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30895768
pii: S0393-2249.19.03391-5
doi: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03391-5
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
113-120Investigateurs
Wouter Everaerts
(W)
Sanchia Goonewardene
(S)
Giovannalberto Pini
(G)
Achilles Ploumidis
(A)
Josep G Sopena
(JG)
Anna Wallerstedt Lantz
(A)