Surgical and functional outcomes of repeat robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy compared with repeat open partial nephrectomy.

Publisher: Blackwell Science Asia Country of Publication: Australia NLM ID: 9440237 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1442-2042 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 09198172 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Int J Urol Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: Carlton South, Vic. : Blackwell Science Asia
Original Publication: Tokyo ; New York : Churchill Livingstone, c1994-

Robotics* ; Kidney Neoplasms*/pathology ; Robotic Surgical Procedures*/adverse effects ; Robotic Surgical Procedures*/methods ; Laparoscopy*/adverse effects ; Laparoscopy*/methods; Humans ; Treatment Outcome ; Retrospective Studies ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology ; Postoperative Complications/etiology ; Postoperative Complications/surgery ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery ; Nephrectomy/adverse effects ; Nephrectomy/methods ; Glomerular Filtration Rate

Objectives: To examine the surgical and functional outcomes of patients who have undergone repeat open partial nephrectomy (reOPN) or robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (reRAPN).
Methods: Until May 2022, 3310 patients with renal tumors underwent nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) at affiliated institutions. Of these, 22 and 17 patients who underwent reOPN and reRAPN, respectively, were included in this study.
Results: No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of sex, age, comorbidities, recurrent tumor size at repeat NSS, interval from recurrence to initial NSS, and nephrometry score. ReRAPN had a shorter operative time (median: 138.0 vs. 214.0 min; p = 0.0023) and less estimated blood loss (median: 50.0 vs. 255.0 mL; p = 0.0261) than reOPN. The incidence of complications with Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2 was higher in the reOPN group than in the reRAPN group (31.8 vs. 5.9%; p = 0.0467). The mean decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate at 3 months postoperatively was not significantly different between the groups. The trifecta achievement rates in the reRAPN (64.7%) and reOPN (27.3%) groups were significantly different (p = 0.0194). On multivariate analysis, age and surgical method were significant predictors of trifecta achievement after partial nephrectomy.
Conclusions: There were no differences in postoperative renal functional outcomes between reOPN and reRAPN. ReRAPN is superior to reOPN in terms of surgical burden. Therefore, ReRAPN is an important minimally invasive surgery for recurrent renal cell carcinoma.
(© 2023 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–249.
Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A, Blute ML, Chow GK, Derweesh IH, et al. Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal Mass. J Urol. 2009;182:1271–1279.
Kreshover JE, Richstone L, Kavoussi LR. Renal cell recurrence for T1 tumors after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2013;27:1468–1470.
Yoshida K, Kondo T, Takagi T, Kobayashi H, Iizuka J, Okumi M, et al. Clinical outcomes of repeat partial nephrectomy compared to initial partial nephrectomy of a solitary kidney. Int J Clin Oncol. 2020;25:1155–1162.
Bratslavsky G, Liu JJ, Johnson AD, Sudarshan S, Choyke PL, Linehan WM, et al. Salvage partial nephrectomy for hereditary renal cancer: feasibility and outcomes. J Urol. 2008;179:67–70.
Magera JS Jr, Frank I, Lohse CM, Leibovich BC, Cheville JC, Blute ML. Analysis of repeat nephron sparing surgery as a treatment option in patients with a solid mass in a renal remnant. J Urol. 2008;179:853–856.
Johnson A, Sudarshan S, Liu J, Linehan WM, Pinto PA, Bratslavsky G. Feasibility and outcomes of repeat partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2008;180:89–93.
Liu NW, Khurana K, Sudarshan S, Pinto PA, Linehan WM, Bratslaysky G. Repeat partial nephrectomy on the solitary kidney: surgical, functional and oncological outcomes. J Urol. 2010;183:1719–1724.
Shuch B, Linehan WM, Bratslavsky G. Repeat partial nephrectomy: surgical, functional and oncological outcomes. Curr Opin Urol. 2011;21:368–375.
Autorino R, Khalifeh A, Laydner H, Samarasekera D, Rizkala E, Eyraud R, et al. Repeat robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN): feasibility and early outcomes. BJU Int. 2013;111:767–772.
Watson MJ, Sidana A, Diaz AW, Siddiqui MM, Hankins RA, Bratslavsky G, et al. Repeat robotic partial nephrectomy: characteristics, complications, and renal functional outcomes. J Endourol. 2016;30:1219–1226.
Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol. 2009;182:844–853.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications ‐ a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien‐Dindo classification of surgical complications five‐year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–196.
Sobin LH, Gospodariwicz M, Wittekind CH. TNM classification of malignant tumors. UICC International Union Against Cancer. 7th ed. New York: Wiley‐Blackwell; 2009. p. 255–257.
Matsuo S, Imai E, Horio M, Yasuda Y, Tomita K, Nitta K, et al. Revised equations for estimated GFR from serum creatinine in Japan. Am J Kidney Dis. 2009;53:982–992.
Levey AS, Eckardt KU, Tsukamoto Y, Levin A, Coresh J, Rossert J, et al. Definition and classification of chronic kidney disease: a position statement from kidney disease: improving global outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int. 2005;67:2089–2100.
Kondo T, Takagi T, Morita S, Omae K, Hashimoto Y, Kobayashi H, et al. Early unclamping might reduce the risk of renal artery pseudoaneurysm after robot‐assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol. 2015;22:1096–1102.
Takagi T, Kondo T, Tachibana H, Iizuka J, Omae K, Kobayashi H, et al. A propensity score‐matched comparison of surgical precision obtained by using volumetric analysis between robot‐assisted laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy for T1 renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective non‐randomized observational study of initial outcomes. Int Urol Nephrol. 2016;48:1585–1591.
Takagi T, Kondo T, Tachibana H, Iizuka J, Omae K, Kobayashi H, et al. Robot‐assisted laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy in patients with chronic kidney disease: a propensity score‐matched comparative analysis of surgical outcomes. Int J Urol. 2017;24:505–510.
Hung AJ, Cai J, Simmons MN, Gill IS. "trifecta" in partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2013;189:36–42.
Abdullah N, Rahbar H, Barod R, Dalela D, Larson J, Johnson M, et al. Multicentre outcomes of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy after major open abdominal surgery. BJU Int. 2016;118:298–301.
Tachibana H, Kondo T, Yoshida K, Takagi T, Tanabe K. Lower incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury in robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy than in open partial nephrectomy: a propensity score‐matched study. J Endourol. 2020;34:754–762.
Yoshida K, Kobari Y, Iizuka J, Kondo T, Ishida H, Tanabe K, et al. Robot‐assisted laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma in patients with severe chronic kidney disease. Int J Urol. 2022;29:1349–1355.

Keywords: kidney; renal cell carcinoma; repeat surgery; robot surgery; urologic surgical procedure

Date Created: 20231226 Date Completed: 20240417 Latest Revision: 20240417

20240417

10.1111/iju.15369

38146740