Department of Urologic Oncology, Max Institute of Cancer Care, Saket, New Delhi, India.
King's College, King's Health Partners, London, UK.
World J Urol. 2022 Sep;40(9):2283-2291. doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04101-4. Epub 2022 Jul 22.
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.
比较后腹腔镜辅助部分肾切除术(RPRAPN)与经腹腔机器人辅助部分肾切除术(TPRAPN)的围手术期结果。
采用 Vattikuti 集合质量倡议(VCQI)数据库,根据手术入路(TPRAPN 和 RPRAPN)计算研究倾向评分,纳入以下独立变量:年龄、性别、手术侧、肾肿瘤体积测量学评分(RNS)、估算肾小球滤过率(eGFR)和血清肌酐。本研究的主要结局是比较两组的 trifecta。
本研究中,309 例行 RPRAPN 的患者与 309 例行 TPRAPN 的患者相匹配。两组在年龄、性别、肿瘤侧、肿瘤极性位置、RNS、术前肌酐和 eGFR 方面匹配良好。RPRAPN 的手术时间和热缺血时间明显缩短。RPRAPN 的术中出血量和输血需求较低。RPRAPN 术中并发症的发生率明显较高。但两组术后并发症无差异。RPRAPN 的 trifecta 结果更好(70.2%比 53%,p<0.0001)。当控制肿瘤位置(前位或后位)时,总体结果没有明显变化。多变量分析显示,手术入路、肿瘤大小和 RNS 是 trifecta 的独立预测因素。
与 TPRAPN 相比,在选择合适的患者中,RPRAPN 具有更好的围手术期结果。然而,后腹腔镜入路的数据来自少数经验丰富的中心,因此限制了本研究结果的普遍性。