Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Robot-assisted Kidney Autotransplantation: Experience of the ERUS RAKT Working Group.


Journal

European urology
ISSN: 1873-7560
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 7512719

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2022
Historique:
received: 04 05 2021
accepted: 22 07 2021
pubmed: 17 8 2021
medline: 19 4 2022
entrez: 16 8 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Kidney autotransplantation is a useful technique to be reserved for cases in which kidney function is compromised by a complex anatomical configuration, such as long ureteral strictures and renal vascular anomalies not suitable for in situ reconstruction. Robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation (RAKAT) presents a novel, minimally invasive, and highly accurate approach. The aim of this study is to present the largest cohort of patients who underwent either extracorporeal (eRAKAT) or intracorporeal (iRAKAT) RAKAT, to confirm safety and feasibility and to compare the two approaches. We retrospectively analyzed prospectively followed patients undergoing eRAKAT and totally intracorporeal RAKAT in a total of three institutions. Extracorporeal RAKAT and iRAKAT. Surgical and functional outcomes of patients subjected to eRAKAT and iRAKAT were measured. Between January 2017 and February 2021, 29 patients underwent RAKAT: 15 eRAKAT and 14 iRAKAT. No statistical difference in the preoperative data was recorded. The analysis of intraoperative variables showed a statistically significant difference between eRAKAT and iRAKAT in cold ischemia time (median [interquartile range {IQR}]: 151 [125-199] vs 27.5 [20-55]; p <  0.001) and total ischemia time (median [IQR]: 196.2 [182-241] vs 81.5 [73-88]; p <  0.001). However, faster renal function recovery in favor of eRAKAT was observed during the first 90 d, with comparable renal function at 1 yr. The 90-d Clavien-Dindo >2 complications were 13.8%. It is important to stress that RAKAT, and above all iRAKAT, should be performed by surgeons with experience in robotic renal, vascular, and transplant surgery. Both eRAKAT and iRAKAT represent promising minimally invasive techniques in selected cases with acceptable ischemia time and comparable long-term operative outcomes. In selected patients, both extra- and intracorporeal robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation represent valid alternatives in case of long ureteral strictures and renal vascular anomalies not suitable for in situ reconstruction.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Kidney autotransplantation is a useful technique to be reserved for cases in which kidney function is compromised by a complex anatomical configuration, such as long ureteral strictures and renal vascular anomalies not suitable for in situ reconstruction. Robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation (RAKAT) presents a novel, minimally invasive, and highly accurate approach.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to present the largest cohort of patients who underwent either extracorporeal (eRAKAT) or intracorporeal (iRAKAT) RAKAT, to confirm safety and feasibility and to compare the two approaches.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed prospectively followed patients undergoing eRAKAT and totally intracorporeal RAKAT in a total of three institutions.
SURGICAL PROCEDURE METHODS
Extracorporeal RAKAT and iRAKAT.
MEASUREMENTS METHODS
Surgical and functional outcomes of patients subjected to eRAKAT and iRAKAT were measured.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS CONCLUSIONS
Between January 2017 and February 2021, 29 patients underwent RAKAT: 15 eRAKAT and 14 iRAKAT. No statistical difference in the preoperative data was recorded. The analysis of intraoperative variables showed a statistically significant difference between eRAKAT and iRAKAT in cold ischemia time (median [interquartile range {IQR}]: 151 [125-199] vs 27.5 [20-55]; p <  0.001) and total ischemia time (median [IQR]: 196.2 [182-241] vs 81.5 [73-88]; p <  0.001). However, faster renal function recovery in favor of eRAKAT was observed during the first 90 d, with comparable renal function at 1 yr. The 90-d Clavien-Dindo >2 complications were 13.8%. It is important to stress that RAKAT, and above all iRAKAT, should be performed by surgeons with experience in robotic renal, vascular, and transplant surgery.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Both eRAKAT and iRAKAT represent promising minimally invasive techniques in selected cases with acceptable ischemia time and comparable long-term operative outcomes.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
In selected patients, both extra- and intracorporeal robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation represent valid alternatives in case of long ureteral strictures and renal vascular anomalies not suitable for in situ reconstruction.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34393012
pii: S0302-2838(21)01926-6
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.07.023
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

168-175

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Alberto Breda (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Pietro Diana (P)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Institute IRCCS, Rozzano, Italy. Electronic address: pietros.diana@gmail.com.

Angelo Territo (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Andrea Gallioli (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Alberto Piana (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Josep Maria Gaya (JM)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Pavel Gavrilov (P)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Liesbeth Desender (L)

Department of Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Benjamin Van Parys (B)

Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Charles Van Praet (C)

Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Edward Lambert (E)

Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Zine-Eddine Khene (ZE)

Department of Urology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.

Vanti Dang (V)

Urology and Renal Transplantation Department, University Hospital of Rangueil, Toulouse, France.

Nicolas Doumerc (N)

Urology and Renal Transplantation Department, University Hospital of Rangueil, Toulouse, France.

Karel Decaestecker (K)

Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH