Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy versus standard laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal hilar tumor: A prospective multi-institutional study.
hilar tumor
partial nephrectomy
prospective studies
renal cell carcinoma
robot-assisted surgery
Journal
International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association
ISSN: 1442-2042
Titre abrégé: Int J Urol
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 9440237
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
received:
09
07
2020
accepted:
23
11
2020
pubmed:
29
12
2020
medline:
14
5
2021
entrez:
28
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To investigate whether robot-assisted partial nephrectomy compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is effective for renal hilar tumor removal. This was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label trial with a 2-year enrollment period. A total of 22 academic hospitals in Japan participated in the present study. Comparison with historical control values from reported studies of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was carried out. The warm ischemia time and positive surgical margin rate were set as primary perioperative and oncological outcomes. In the historical control group, these were 27.7 min and 13%, respectively. The analysis population included 105 participants. The mean warm ischemia time was 20.2 (95% confidence interval 16.7-21.8; P < 0.0001 vs 27.7). Two of 103 participants (1.9%) had a positive surgical margin (95% confidence interval 0.5-6.8%). Both results satisfy the prespecified decision criteria for the superiority of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy over the historical control of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Resected weight and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate were predictive factors of functional loss of the partially nephrectomized kidney after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for clinical T1 renal hilar tumors results in shorter warm ischemia time than and comparable positive surgical margin rate to those reported for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
382-389Subventions
Organisme : Intuitive Surgical Sarl, France
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Japanese Urological Association.
Références
Finelli A, Ismaila N, Bro B et al. Management of small renal masses: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017; 35: 668-80.
Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Abu-Ghanem Y et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2019 Update. Eur. Urol. 2019; 75: 799-810.
Pierorazio PM, Patel HD, Feng T, Yohannan J, Hyams ES, Allaf ME. Robotic-assisted versus traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: comparison of outcomes and evaluation of learning curve. Urology 2011; 78: 813-9.
Gettman MT, Blute ML, Chow GK, Neururer R, Bartsch G, Peschel R. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: technique and initial clinical experience with DaVinci robotic system. Urology 2004; 64: 914-8.
Gautam G, Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Zorn KC. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: current perspectives and future prospects. Urology 2009; 74: 735-40.
Wang AJ, Bhayani SB. Robotic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: single-surgeon analysis of >100 consecutive procedures. Urology 2009; 73: 306-10.
Choi JE, You JH, Kim DK, Rha KH, Lee SH. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Urol. 2015; 67: 891-901.
Leow JJ, Heah NH, Chang SL, Chong YL, Png KS. Outcomes of Robotic versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: an Updated Meta-Analysis of 4,919 Patients. J. Urol. 2016; 196: 1371-7.
Zhang X, Yan J, Ren Y, Shen C, Ying X, Pan S. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a meta-analysis. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med. 2014; 7: 4770-9.
Gill IS, Colombo JR Jr, Frank I, Moinzadeh A, Kaouk J, Desai M. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors. J. Urol. 2005; 174: 850-3.
Buffi NM, Saita A, Lughezzani G et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for complex (PADUA score ≥10) tumors: techniques and results from a multicenter experience at four high-volume centers. Eur. Urol. 2020; 77: 95-100.
Hinata N, Fujisawa M. Robot assisted partial nephrectomy: technique and outcomes. In: Chan ES-Y, Matsuda T (ed). Endourology Progress: Technique, technology and training. Springer Singapore, Singapore, 2019; 117-26.
Hinata N, Fujisawa M. Current status of robotic partial nephrectomy in Japan. Investig. Clin. Urol. 2016; 57: S121-S129.
Reisiger K, Venkatesh R, Figenshau RS, Bae KT, Landman J. Complex laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal hilar tumors. Urology 2005; 65: 888-91.
Richstone L, Montag S, Ost M, Reggio E, Permpongkosol S, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: evaluation of short-term oncologic outcome. Urology 2008; 71: 36-40.
Lattouf JB, Beri A, D’Ambros OF, Grull M, Leeb K, Janetschek G. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: technique and results. Eur. Urol. 2008; 54: 409-16.
George AK, Herati AS, Rais-Bahrami S, Waingankar N, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: oncologic and renal functional outcomes. Urology 2014; 83: 111-5.
Di Pierro GB, Tartaglia N, Aresu L et al. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for endophytic hilar tumors: feasibility and outcomes. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2014; 40: 769-74.
Mantel N. Rapid estimation of standard errors of means for small samples. Am. Statist. 1951; 5: 26-7.
Normand SLT. Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Stat. Med. 1999; 18: 321-59.
Miyake H, Hinata N, Imai S, Furukawa J, Tanaka K, Fujisawa M. Partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: comparison of conventional open and robot-assisted approaches. Int. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015; 20: 808-13.
Altman D, Machin D, Bryant T, Gardner M. Statistics With Confidence: Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2013.
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann. Surg. 2009; 250: 187-96.
Eyraud R, Long JA, Snow-Lisy D et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: perioperative outcomes. Urology 2013; 81: 1246-51.
Sunaryo PL, Paulucci DJ, Okhawere K et al. A multi-institutional analysis of 263 hilar tumors during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. J. Robot Surg. 2019; 14: 585-91.
Lu SY, Chung HJ, Huang EY, Lin TP, Lin ATL. The perioperative outcomes between renal hilar and non-hilar tumors following robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2018; 81: 676-81.
Dulabon LM, Kaouk JH, Haber GP et al. Multi-institutional analysis of robotic partial nephrectomy for hilar versus nonhilar lesions in 446 consecutive cases. Eur. Urol. 2011; 59: 325-30.
Tanaka K, Teishima J, Takenaka A et al. Prospective study of robotic partial nephrectomy for renal cancer in Japan: Comparison with a historical control undergoing laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int. J. Urol. 2018; 25: 472-8.
Volpe A, Blute ML, Ficarra V et al. Renal ischemia and function after partial nephrectomy: a collaborative review of the literature. Eur. Urol. 2015; 68: 61-74.
Rehling M, Nielsen BV, Pedersen EB, Nielsen LE, Hansen HE, Bacher T. Renal and extrarenal clearance of 99mTc-MAG3: a comparison with 125I-OIH and 51Cr-EDTA in patients representing all levels of glomerular filtration rate. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. 1995; 22: 1379-84.
Rod X, Peyronnet B, Seisen T et al. Impact of ischaemia time on renal function after partial nephrectomy: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2016; 118: 692-705.
Greco F, Autorino R, Altieri V et al. Ischemia techniques in nephron-sparing surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes. Eur. Urol. 2019; 75: 477-91.
Lane BR, Gill IS, Fergany AF, Larson BT, Campbell SC. Limited warm ischemia during elective partial nephrectomy has only a marginal impact on renal functional outcomes. J. Urol. 2011; 185: 1598-603.
Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM et al. Renal function after partial nephrectomy: effect of warm ischemia relative to quantity and quality of preserved kidney. Urology 2012; 79: 356-60.
Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A et al. Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal mass. J. Urol. 2009; 182: 1271-9.
Scosyrev E, Messing EM, Sylvester R, Campbell S, Van Poppel H. Renal function after nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephrectomy: results from EORTC randomized trial 30904. Eur. Urol. 2014; 65: 372-7.
Klebanoff MA, Snowden JM. Historical (retrospective) cohort studies and other epidemiologic study designs in perinatal research. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 219: 447-50.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. E10 Choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials. 2001. [Cited 21 Dec 2020.] Available from URL: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/e10-choice-control-group-and-related-issues-clinical-trials