Comparison of perioperative outcomes following transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a propensity-matched analysis of VCQI database.


Journal

World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Historique:
received: 06 03 2022
accepted: 07 07 2022
pubmed: 23 7 2022
medline: 2 9 2022
entrez: 22 7 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To compare perioperative outcomes following retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPRAPN) and transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (TPRAPN). With this Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database, study propensity scores were calculated according to the surgical access (TPRAPN and RPRAPN) for the following independent variables, i.e., age, sex, side of the surgery, RENAL nephrometry scores (RNS), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and serum creatinine. The study's primary outcome was the comparison of trifecta between the two groups. In this study, 309 patients who underwent RPRAPN were matched with 309 patients who underwent TPRAPN. The two groups matched well for age, sex, tumor side, polar location of the tumor, RNS, preoperative creatinine and eGFR. Operative time and warm ischemia time were significantly shorter with RPRAPN. Intraoperative blood loss and need for blood transfusion were lower with RPRAPN. There was a significantly higher number of intraoperative complications with RPRAPN. However, there was no difference in the two groups for postoperative complications. Trifecta outcomes were better with RPRAPN (70.2% vs. 53%, p < 0.0001) compared to TPRAPN. We noted no significant change in overall results when controlled for tumor location (anteriorly or posteriorly). The surgical approach, tumor size and RNS were identified as independent predictors of trifecta on multivariate analysis. RPRAPN is associated with superior perioperative outcomes in well-selected patients compared to TPRAPN. However, the data for the retroperitoneal approach were contributed by a few centers with greater experience with this technique, thus limiting the generalizability of the results of this study.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35867142
doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04101-4
pii: 10.1007/s00345-022-04101-4
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2283-2291

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Références

Ljungberg B, Campbell SC, Choi HY, Jacqmin D, Lee JE, Weikert S et al (2011) The epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 60:615–621
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.049
Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S, Dabestani S, Hofmann F, Hora M et al (2015) EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update. Eur Urol 67:913–924
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.005
Campbell S, Uzzo RG, Allaf ME, Bass EB, Cadeddu JA, Chang A et al (2017) Renal mass and localized renal cancer: AUA guideline. J Urol 198:520–529
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.04.100
Van Poppel H, Da Pozzo L, Albrecht W, Matveev V, Bono A, Borkowski A et al (2011) A prospective, randomised EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the oncologic outcome of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 59:543–552
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.12.013
Wu Z, Li M, Liu B, Cai C, Ye H, Lv C et al (2014) Robotic versus open partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9:e94878
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094878
Gul ZG, Tam A, Badani KK (2020) Robotic partial nephrectomy: the current status. Indian J Urol 36:16–20
pubmed: 31983821 pmcid: 6961424
Dell’Oglio P, De Naeyer G, Xiangjun L, Hamilton Z, Capitanio U, Ripa F et al (2021) The impact of surgical strategy in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: is it beneficial to treat anterior tumours with transperitoneal access and posterior tumours with retroperitoneal access? Eur Urol Oncol. 4:112–116
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.12.010
Arora S, Heulitt G, Menon M, Jeong W, Ahlawat RK, Capitanio U et al (2018) Retroperitoneal vs transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: comparison in a multi-institutional setting. Urology 120:131–137
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.06.026
Carbonara U, Eun D, Derweesh I, Capitanio U, Celia A, Fiori C et al (2021) Retroperitoneal versus transepritoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for postero-lateral renal masses: an international multicenter analysis. World J Urol 39:4175–4182
doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03741-2
Harke NN, Darr C, Radtke JP, von Ostau N, Schiefelbein F, Eraky A et al (2021) Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: a multicenter matched-pair analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 7:1363–1370
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.08.012
Mittakanti HR, Heulitt G, Li HF, Porter JR (2020) Transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: a matched-paired analysis. World J Urol 38:1093–1099
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02903-7
Paulucci DJ, Beksac AT, Porter J, Abaza R, Eun DD, Bhandari A et al (2019) A multi-institutional propensity score matched comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy for cT1 posterior tumors. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 29:29–34
doi: 10.1089/lap.2018.0313
Porpiglia F, Mari A, Amparore D, Fiori C, Antonelli A, Artibani W et al (2021) Transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal minimally invasive partial nephrectomy: comparison of perioperative outcomes and functional follow-up in a large multi-institutional cohort (The RECORD 2 Project). Surg Endosc. 35:4295–4304
doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07919-4
Socarrás MR, Elbers JR, Rivas JG, Autran AM, Esperto F, Tortolero L et al (2021) Retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (rRAPN): surgical technique and review. Curr Urol Rep. 22:33
doi: 10.1007/s11934-021-01051-z
Takagi T, Yoshida K, Kondo T, Kobayashi H, Iizuka J, Okumi M et al (2021) Comparisons of surgical outcomes between transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches in robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for lateral renal tumors: a propensity score-matched comparative analysis. J Robot Surg 15:99–104
doi: 10.1007/s11701-020-01086-3
Zhou J, Liu ZH, Cao DH, Peng ZF, Song P, Yang L et al (2021) Retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy, which one is better? Cancer Med 10:3299–3308
doi: 10.1002/cam4.3888
Pavan N, Derweesh I, Hampton LJ, White WM, Porter J, Challacombe BJ et al (2018) Retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative outcomes. J Endourol. 32:591–596
doi: 10.1089/end.2018.0211
Arora S, Abaza R, Adshead JM, Ahlawat RK, Challacombe BJ, Dasgupta P et al (2018) “Trifecta” outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in solitary kidney: A Vattikuti collective quality initiative (VCQI) database analysis. BJU Int 121:119–123
doi: 10.1111/bju.13967
Arora S, Bronkema C, Porter JR, Mottrie A, Dasgupta P, Challacombe B et al (2020) Omission of cortical renorrhaphy during robotic partial nephrectomy: a Vattikuti collective quality initiative database analysis. Urology 146:125–132
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.003
Kutikov A, Uzzo RG (2009) The RENAL nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol 182:844–853
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.05.035
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
StataCorp, (2019) Stata statistical software: release 16. StataCorp LLC, College station
Choi CI, Kang M, Sung HH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Jeon SS et al (2020) Comparison by pentafecta criteria of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy for large renal tumors. J Endourol. 34:175–183
doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0410
Malki M, Oakley J, Hussain M, Barber N (2019) Retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in obese patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 29:1027–1032
doi: 10.1089/lap.2019.0273
Isac WE, Autorino R, Hillyer SP, Hernandez AV, Stein RJ, Kaouk JH (2012) The impact of body mass index on surgical outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 110:E997
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11318.x
Komninos C, Tuliao P, Koo KC, Chang CH, Han WK, Rha KH (2015) Obesity is not associated with increased operative complications in single-site robotic partial nephrectomy. Yonsei Med J 56:382–387
doi: 10.3349/ymj.2015.56.2.382
Rosen DC, Kannappan M, Kim Y, Paulucci DJ, Beksac AT, Abaza R et al (2019) The impact of obesity in patients undergoing robotic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 33:431–437
doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0018

Auteurs

Gopal Sharma (G)

Department of Urologic Oncology, Max Institute of Cancer Care, Saket, New Delhi, India.

Milap Shah (M)

Department of Urologic Oncology, Max Institute of Cancer Care, Saket, New Delhi, India.

Puneet Ahluwalia (P)

Department of Urologic Oncology, Max Institute of Cancer Care, Saket, New Delhi, India.

Prokar Dasgupta (P)

King's College, King's Health Partners, London, UK.

Benjamin J Challacombe (BJ)

Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Mahendra Bhandari (M)

Vattikuti Foundation, Detroit, MI, USA.

Rajesh Ahlawat (R)

The Medicity Hospital, New Delhi, India.

Sudhir Rawal (S)

Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.

Nicolo M Buffi (NM)

Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, MI, Italy.

Ananthkrishnan Sivaraman (A)

Chennai Urology and Robotics Institute, Chennai, India.

James R Porter (JR)

Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA.

Craig Rogers (C)

Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.

Alexandre Mottrie (A)

ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Ronney Abaza (R)

Central Ohio Urology Group, Mount Carmel Health System Prostate Cancer Program, Columbus, OH, USA.

Khoon Ho Rha (KH)

Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, South Korea.

Daniel Moon (D)

Peter MacCallum Hospital, University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Clinical School, Melbourne, Australia.

Thyavihally B Yuvaraja (TB)

Kokilaben Dhirubhai Ambani Hospital, Mumbai, India.

Dipen J Parekh (DJ)

University of Miami Health System, Miami, FL, USA.

Umberto Capitanio (U)

Urological Research Institute (URI), IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.

Kris K Maes (KK)

Center for Robotic and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Hospital Da Luz, Luz Sáude, Portugal.

Francesco Porpiglia (F)

San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital of Orbassano, Turin, Italy.

Levent Turkeri (L)

Acıbadem M.A., Department of Urology, Aydınlar University, Altuzinade Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Gagan Gautam (G)

Department of Urologic Oncology, Max Institute of Cancer Care, Saket, New Delhi, India. gagangg@gmail.com.

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