Cargando…

Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis

OBJECTIVES: To present the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with RENAL nephrometry scores ≥7. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and seventy pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Deng, Wen, Li, Junhua, Liu, Xiaoqiang, Chen, Luyao, Liu, Weipeng, Zhou, Xiaochen, Zhu, Jingyu, Fu, Bin, Wang, Gongxian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6970028/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31788986
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2749
_version_ 1783489433616515072
author Deng, Wen
Li, Junhua
Liu, Xiaoqiang
Chen, Luyao
Liu, Weipeng
Zhou, Xiaochen
Zhu, Jingyu
Fu, Bin
Wang, Gongxian
author_facet Deng, Wen
Li, Junhua
Liu, Xiaoqiang
Chen, Luyao
Liu, Weipeng
Zhou, Xiaochen
Zhu, Jingyu
Fu, Bin
Wang, Gongxian
author_sort Deng, Wen
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To present the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with RENAL nephrometry scores ≥7. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and seventy patients, during the study period, were retrospectively reviewed in our analysis according to inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) method was applied to impose restrictions on the potential baseline confounders. The comparisons of perioperative and functional outcomes between the RPN and LPN groups were conducted and analyzed after PSM, Kaplan‐Meier analyses were performed to assess the differences about oncological outcomes between the two groups before and after PSM. RESULTS: One hundred and nine and 61 T1b renal tumors with RENAL scores ≥7 were identified in the LPN and RPN groups, respectively. All significant differences in baseline characteristics disappeared after PSM. Except for 3 patients missing an appropriate pair, all the patients in the RPN group were successfully matched to 58 patients in the LPN group in a 1:1 ratio. Within the matched cohort, the RPN group was related to a significantly shorter mean operating time (OT) (P = .040), shorter mean warm ischemia time (WIT) (P = .023), and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (P = .023). The possibilities of surgical conversion, postoperative complication, and positive surgical margin were similar in the LPN and RPN groups. And there was also no significant difference in the pathological, renal functional, and oncological outcomes between the two series. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7, RPN had an advantage over LPN in reducing OT, WIT, and postoperative hospital stay length without increasing the risk of complications and weakening the oncological control, while the two surgical methods were similar in renal functional preservation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6970028
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69700282020-01-27 Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis Deng, Wen Li, Junhua Liu, Xiaoqiang Chen, Luyao Liu, Weipeng Zhou, Xiaochen Zhu, Jingyu Fu, Bin Wang, Gongxian Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research OBJECTIVES: To present the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with RENAL nephrometry scores ≥7. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and seventy patients, during the study period, were retrospectively reviewed in our analysis according to inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) method was applied to impose restrictions on the potential baseline confounders. The comparisons of perioperative and functional outcomes between the RPN and LPN groups were conducted and analyzed after PSM, Kaplan‐Meier analyses were performed to assess the differences about oncological outcomes between the two groups before and after PSM. RESULTS: One hundred and nine and 61 T1b renal tumors with RENAL scores ≥7 were identified in the LPN and RPN groups, respectively. All significant differences in baseline characteristics disappeared after PSM. Except for 3 patients missing an appropriate pair, all the patients in the RPN group were successfully matched to 58 patients in the LPN group in a 1:1 ratio. Within the matched cohort, the RPN group was related to a significantly shorter mean operating time (OT) (P = .040), shorter mean warm ischemia time (WIT) (P = .023), and shorter median postoperative hospital stay (P = .023). The possibilities of surgical conversion, postoperative complication, and positive surgical margin were similar in the LPN and RPN groups. And there was also no significant difference in the pathological, renal functional, and oncological outcomes between the two series. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7, RPN had an advantage over LPN in reducing OT, WIT, and postoperative hospital stay length without increasing the risk of complications and weakening the oncological control, while the two surgical methods were similar in renal functional preservation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6970028/ /pubmed/31788986 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2749 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Cancer Research
Deng, Wen
Li, Junhua
Liu, Xiaoqiang
Chen, Luyao
Liu, Weipeng
Zhou, Xiaochen
Zhu, Jingyu
Fu, Bin
Wang, Gongxian
Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis
title Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis
title_full Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis
title_fullStr Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis
title_full_unstemmed Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis
title_short Robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex T1b renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score ≥7: A propensity score‐based analysis
title_sort robot‐assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for anatomically complex t1b renal tumors with a renal nephrometry score ≥7: a propensity score‐based analysis
topic Clinical Cancer Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6970028/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31788986
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2749
work_keys_str_mv AT dengwen robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT lijunhua robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT liuxiaoqiang robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT chenluyao robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT liuweipeng robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT zhouxiaochen robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT zhujingyu robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT fubin robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis
AT wanggongxian robotassistedversuslaparoscopicpartialnephrectomyforanatomicallycomplext1brenaltumorswitharenalnephrometryscore7apropensityscorebasedanalysis