Comparison of perioperative outcomes following transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a propensity-matched analysis of VCQI database

Sharma, G; Shah, M; Ahluwalia, P; Dasgupta, P; Challacombe, BJ; Bhandari, M; Ahlawat, R; Rawal, S; Buffi, NM; Sivaraman, A; Porter, JR; Rogers, C; Mottrie, A; Abaza, R; Rha, KH; Moon, D; Yuvaraja, TB; Parekh, DJ; Capitanio, U; Maes, KK; Porpiglia, F; Turkeri, L; Gautam, G

Author(s): Sharma, G; Shah, M; Ahluwalia, P; Dasgupta, P; Challacombe, BJ; Bhandari, M; Ahlawat, R; Rawal, S; Buffi, NM; Sivaraman, A; Porter, JR; Rogers, C; Mottrie, A; Abaza, R; Rha, KH; Moon, D; Yuvaraja, TB; Parekh, DJ; Capitanio, U; Maes, KK; Porpiglia, F; Turkeri, L; Gautam, G;
Details: Publication Year 2022-09,Volume 40,Issue #9,Page 2283-2291
Journal Title: World Journal of Urology
Publication Type: Research article
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative outcomes following retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPRAPN) and transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (TPRAPN). METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.
Keywords: Blood Transfusion; Humans; *Kidney Neoplasms/pathology/surgery; Nephrectomy/methods; Retrospective Studies; *Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods; *Robotics; Treatment Outcome; Partial nephrectomy; Propensity matching; Rapn; Retroperitoneal
Department(s): Surgical Oncology
PubMed ID: 35867142
Publisher's Version: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04101-4
Terms of Use/Rights Notice: Refer to copyright notice on published article.

Creation Date: 2025-04-04 12:33:51

Last Modified: 2025-04-04 12:35:17