Mager Rene, Tsaur Igor, Höfner Thomas, Gheith Mohamed Kamal, Duwe Gregor, Haack Maximilian, Azar Jonathan, Aboulmaouahib Brahim, Ziewers Stefanie, Sparwasser Peter, Frey Lisa, Thomas Anita, Haferkamp Axel
Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Int J Med Robot. 2025 Jun;21(3):e70077. doi: 10.1002/rcs.70077.
The value of the retroperitoneal (R-RAPN) compared with the conventional transperitoneal (T-RAPN) approach in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy has not been finally clarified. The current work's objective was to prospectively investigate R-RAPN versus T-RAPN.
The study was designed as a prospective, controlled, non-randomized study with a non-inferiority design. The primary endpoint was Trifecta achievement. The sample size calculation required 141 T-RAPN and 94 R-RAPN.
When the recruitment target of 141 was reached in the T-RAPN arm, only 34 R-RAPN had been performed, so the study was terminated early. Trifecta as the main outcome parameter was achieved in 82% of the R-RAPN and 76% of the T-RAPN groups, so no sign for inferiority could be detected (p = 0.6).
In this prospective study, there was no evidence of inferiority of R-RAPN compared to T-RAPN for the Trifecta endpoint. R-RAPN may be an individually advantageous alternative to T-RAPN for selected patients.
The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00028619).
在机器人辅助的部分肾切除术中,与传统经腹腔途径(T-RAPN)相比,腹膜后途径(R-RAPN)的价值尚未最终明确。本研究的目的是前瞻性地比较R-RAPN和T-RAPN。
本研究设计为一项前瞻性、对照、非随机的非劣效性研究。主要终点是三联成功。样本量计算需要141例T-RAPN和94例R-RAPN。
当T-RAPN组达到141例的招募目标时,仅进行了34例R-RAPN,因此研究提前终止。R-RAPN组和T-RAPN组分别有82%和76%的患者达到三联成功这一主要结局参数,因此未检测到非劣效迹象(p = 0.6)。
在这项前瞻性研究中,对于三联成功终点,没有证据表明R-RAPN比T-RAPN差。对于选定的患者,R-RAPN可能是T-RAPN的一个具有个体优势的替代方案。
该研究已在德国临床试验注册中心(DRKS00028619)注册。