The use of hemostatic agents does not prevent hemorrhagic complications of robotic partial nephrectomy.

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of HA on robotic PN (RPN) outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent RPN in eight centers between 2009 and 2013. Hemorrhagic complications were defined as the occurrence of a pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula or hematoma requiring transfusion. Patients were first divided into two groups: group A (use of at least one HA) and group B (no HA used), and then into five groups to assess the impact of each HA: group 1 (no HA), group 2 (Floseal(®) only), group 3 (Surgicel(®) only), group 4 (Tachosil(®) only) and group 5 (Surgicel(®) + Floseal(®)). The impact of HA was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 515 RPN, 315 (61 %) were done using at least one HA (group A) and 200 (39 %) were done without any HA (group B). Patients in both groups had similar hemorrhagic complication rates (13 % vs. 15 %, p = 0.42) and postoperative complication rates (19 % vs. 23 %, p = 0.32). In multivariate analysis, the absence of HA was not a risk factor for hemorrhagic complications (OR 0.77, p = 0.54). When each type of HA was considered individually, none was associated with the occurrence of hemorrhagic complication either in univariate or in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter study, the use of HA was not associated with a lower risk of hemorrhagic or global complications.