Grivas Nikolaos, Kalampokis Nikolaos, Larcher Alessandro, Tyritzis Stavros, Rha Koon H, Ficarra Vincenzo, Buffi Nicoló, Ploumidis Achilles, Autorino Riccardo, Porpiglia Francesco, van der Poel Henk, Mottrie Alexandre, de Naeyer Geert
Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands -
Department of Urology, G. Hatzikosta General Hospital, Ioannina, Greece -
Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2019 Apr;71(2):113-120. doi: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03391-5. Epub 2019 Mar 18.
Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is increasingly used for the surgical management of renal masses. Aim of this study was to analyze the available literature regarding the outcomes of RAPN compared to those of open partial nephrectomy (OPN).
A literature search was performed up to October 2018 using PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase. Article selection followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) principles and Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes (PICO) methodology was used. Population (P) was patients with renal masses who underwent RAPN (I). RAPN was compared with OPN (C). Outcomes of interest were perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes of both surgical procedures (O). Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled studies andobservational cohort studies comparing RAPN versus OPN, which reported at least one outcome of interest.
Twenty-two manuscripts met our inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. RAPN was superior to OPN in terms of complication rate in 11 studies while similar results were observed in 9 studies. Positive surgical margins were similar in 13 studies while RAPN had lower surgical margins in 6 studies. Operative and warm ischemia times were longer in OPN in 13 and 10 studies, respectively. Seventeen and 19 studies showed that estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay were higher in RAPN. Estimated glomerular filtration rate decline and chronic kidney disease upstaging decline were similar in the majority of studies.
Current evidence demonstrate that RAPN is a reasonable alternative to OPN with regard to oncological and early functional outcomes with a straightforward advantage of improved perioperative morbidity, as expected by minimally invasive techniques. Nevertheless, there is still a great need for well-designed randomized studies with an extended follow-up.
机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RAPN)越来越多地用于肾脏肿块的外科治疗。本研究的目的是分析与开放性部分肾切除术(OPN)相比,有关RAPN手术结果的现有文献。
截至2018年10月,使用PubMed、MEDLINE和Embase进行了文献检索。文章选择遵循系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)原则,并采用了人群、干预措施、对照、结局(PICO)方法。人群(P)为接受RAPN的肾脏肿块患者(I)。将RAPN与OPN进行比较(C)。感兴趣的结局(O)是两种手术的围手术期、肿瘤学和功能结局。纳入标准为:比较RAPN与OPN的随机对照研究和观察性队列研究,且报告了至少一项感兴趣的结局。
22篇手稿符合我们的纳入标准,并被纳入系统评价。11项研究表明RAPN在并发症发生率方面优于OPN,9项研究观察到类似结果。13项研究中阳性手术切缘相似,6项研究中RAPN的手术切缘较低。分别有13项和10项研究表明OPN的手术时间和热缺血时间更长。17项和19项研究表明RAPN的估计失血量和住院时间更长。大多数研究中估计肾小球滤过率下降和慢性肾脏病分期进展下降相似。
目前的证据表明,就肿瘤学和早期功能结局而言,RAPN是OPN的合理替代方案,具有微创技术预期的围手术期发病率改善的直接优势。然而,仍然非常需要设计良好的、随访期延长的随机研究。