Dataset Information

Comparison of Perioperative, Renal Functional, and Oncological Outcomes Between Off-Clamp and On-Clamp Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Tumors: An Updated Evidence-Based Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

We aimed to report the latest and largest pooled analysis and evidence update to compare the perioperative, renal functional, and oncological outcomes between off-clamp and on-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for renal tumors.

Patients and methods

We performed a systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science up to August 2021 for studies that compared the efficacy and/or safety between off-clamp and on-clamp RAPN for renal tumors. Outcomes measured were operating time, estimated blood loss (EBL), conversion rate, length of stay (LOS), complication rate, transfusion rate, long-term % decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), positive surgical margin rate, and recurrence rate.

Results

A total of 21 eligible articles involving 4,493 patients (1,274 off-clamp versus 3,219 on-clamp) were included for the evidence synthesis. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar in all outcomes except that lower R.E.N.A.L. score and smaller tumor size were observed in the off-clamp group. Pooled analysis showed shorter operative time, higher EBL, and lower complication rate in the off-clamp group. No significant difference was observed in the conversion rate, LOS, and transfusion rate. The recurrence rates were similar in the two groups, while a lower positive surgical margin rate was observed in the off-clamp group. Finally, the off-clamp group had a superior postoperative renal functional outcome.

Conclusions

Given the presence of heterogeneity and potential bias, urologists should select the clamp strategy based on their experience and patient-specific factors.

SUBMITTER: Huang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8490928 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceTechnical skill in complex surgical procedures may affect clinical outcomes, and there is growing interest in understanding the clinical implications of surgeon proficiency levels.ObjectivesTo determine whether surgeon scores representing technical skills of robot-assisted kidney surgery are associated with patient outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis quality improvement study included 10 urological surgeons participating in a surgical collaborative in Michigan from July 2021 to September 2022. Each surgeon submitted up to 7 videos of themselves performing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Videos were segmented into 6 key steps, yielding 127 video clips for analysis. Each video clip was deidentified and distributed to at least 3 of the 24 blinded peer surgeons from the collaborative who also perform robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Reviewers rated technical skill and provided written feedback. Statistical analysis was performed from May 2023 to January 2024.Main outcomes and measuresReviewers scored each video clip using a validated instrument to assess technical skill for partial nephrectomy on a scale of 1 to 5 (higher scores indicating greater skill). For all submitting surgeons, outcomes from a clinical registry were assessed for length of stay (LOS) greater than 3 days, estimated blood loss (EBL) greater than 500 mL, warm ischemia time (WIT) greater than 30 minutes, positive surgical margin (PSM), 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, and 30-day readmission.ResultsAmong the 27 unique surgeons who participated in this study as reviewers and/or individuals performing the procedures, 3 (11%) were female, and the median age was 47 (IQR, 39-52) years. Risk-adjusted outcomes were associated with scores representing surgeon skills. The overall performance score ranged from 3.5 to 4.7 points with a mean (SD) of 4.1 (0.4) points. Greater skill was correlated with significantly lower rates of LOS greater than 3 days (-6.8% [95% CI, -8.3% to -5.2%]), EBL greater than 500 mL (-2.6% [95% CI, -3.0% to -2.1%]), PSM (-8.2% [95% CI, -9.2% to -7.2%]), ED visits (-3.9% [95% CI, -5.0% to -2.8%]), and readmissions (-5.7% [95% CI, -6.9% to -4.6%]) (P < .001 for all). Higher overall score was also associated with higher partial nephrectomy volume (β coefficient, 11.4 [95% CI, 10.0-12.7]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this quality improvement study on video-based evaluation of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy, higher technical skill was associated with lower rates of adverse clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that video-based evaluation plays a role in assessing surgical skill and can be used in quality improvement initiatives to improve patient care.

Project description:Objective To evaluate the current literature comparing outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) treating complex renal tumors (RENAL nephrometry score ≥7). Methods We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Scopus databases up to March 2023. Review Manager 5.4 performed a pooled analysis of the data for random effects. Besides, sensitivity and subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and GRADE to evaluate study quality and level of evidence. Results Eight observational studies comprising 1346 patients (RPN: 695; LPN: 651) were included in this study. Compared to LPN, RPN had a shorter operative time (OT) (weight mean difference [WMD]: -14.73 min; p = 0.0003), shorter warm ischemia time (WIT) (WMD: -3.47 min; p = 0.002), lower transfusion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.66; p = 0.04), shorter length of stay (LOS) (WMD: -0.65 days; p < 0.00001), lower postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) change (WMD = -2.33 mL/min/1.73 m2; p = 0.002) and lower intraoperative complications (OR: 0.52; p = 0.04). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.84), conversion to radical nephrectomy (p = 0.12), postoperative complications (p = 0.11), major complications (defined Clavien–Dindo grade 3 (p = 0.43), overall complications (p = 0.15), postoperative eGFR (p = 0.28), local recurrence (p = 0.35), positive surgical margin (PSM) (p = 0.63), overall survival (OS) (p = 0.47), cancer-specific survival (CSS) (p = 0.22) and 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) (p = 0.53). Conclusion Patients with complex renal tumors (RENAL score ≥7), RPN is superior to LPN in decreasing the OT, WIT, LOS, transfusion rate, change in eGFR and the incidence of intraoperative complications while maintaining oncological control and avoiding a decline in renal function. However, our findings need further validation in a large-sample prospective randomized study.

Project description:ObjectiveRobot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) has become widely used for treatment of renal cell carcinoma and it is expanding in the field of complex renal masses. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze outcomes of RAPN for completely endophytic renal masses, large tumors (cT2-T3), renal cell carcinoma in solitary kidney, recurrent tumors, completely endophytic and hilar masses, and simultaneous and multiple tumors.MethodsA comprehensive search in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed in December 2022 for English language papers. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the role of RAPN in the setting of each category of complex renal masses considered. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes.ResultsAfter screening 1250 records, 43 full-text manuscripts were selected, comprising over 8500 patients. Twelve and thirteen studies reported data for endophytic and hilar renal masses, respectively. Five and three studies reported outcomes for cT2-T3 and solitary kidney patients, respectively. Four studies focused on redo-RAPN for recurrent tumors. Two studies investigated simultaneous bilateral renal masses and five reports focused on multiple tumor excision in ipsilateral kidney.ConclusionOver the past decade, evidence supporting the use of RAPN for the most challenging nephron-sparing surgery indications has continuously grown. Although limitations remain including study design and lack of detailed long-term functional and oncological outcomes, the adoption of RAPN for the included advanced indications is associated with favorable surgical outcomes with good preservation of renal function without compromising the oncological result. Certainly, a higher likelihood of complication might be expected when facing extremely challenging cases. However, none of these indications should be considered per se an exclusion criterion for performing RAPN. Ultimately, a risk-adapted approach should be employed.