Do we need to clamp the renal hilum liberally during the initial phase of the learning curve of robot-assisted nephron-sparing surgery?

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the results of our initial robot-assisted nephron-sparing surgeries (RANSS) performed with or without hilar clamping.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Charts of the initial RANSSs (n = 44), which were performed by a single surgeon, were retrospectively reviewed. R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system, modified Clavien classification, and M.D.R.D. equation were used to record tumoral complexity, complications, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), respectively. Outcomes of the clamped (group 1, n = 14) versus off-clamp (group 2, n = 30) RANSSs were compared.

RESULTS

The difference between the two groups was insignificant regarding mean patient age, mean tumor size, and mean R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score. Mean operative time, mean estimated blood loss amount, and mean length of hospitalization were similar between groups. A total of 4 patients in each group suffered 11 Clavien grade ≥ 2 complications early postoperatively. Open conversion rates were similar. The difference between the 2 groups in terms of the mean postoperative change in eGFR was insignificant. We did not encounter any local recurrence after a mean follow-up of 18.9 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Creating warm-ischemic conditions during RANSS should not be a liberal decision, even in the initial phases of the learning curve for a highly experienced open surgeon.