Agnes J. Wang

Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: a multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes.

PURPOSE Robot assisted partial nephrectomy is rapidly emerging as an alternative to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for the treatment of renal malignancy. We present the largest multi-institution comparison of the 2 approaches to date, describing outcomes from 3 experienced minimally invasive surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a retrospective chart review, evaluating 118 consecutive laparoscopic partial nephrectomies and 129 consecutive robot assisted partial nephrectomies performed between 2004 and 2008 by 3 experienced minimally invasive surgeons at 3 academic centers. Perioperative data were recorded along with clinical and pathological outcomes. RESULTS The robot assisted and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy groups were equivalent in terms of age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (2.3 vs 2.4) and radiographic tumor size (2.9 vs 2.6 cm), respectively. Comparison of operative data revealed no significant differences in terms of overall operative time (189 vs 174 minutes), collecting system entry (47% vs 54%), pathological tumor size (2.8 vs 2.5 cm) and positive margin rate (3.9% vs 1%) for robot assisted and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, respectively. Intraoperative blood loss was less for robot assisted vs laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (155 vs 196 ml, p = 0.03) as was length of hospital stay (2.4 vs 2.7 days, p <0.0001). Warm ischemia times were significantly shorter in the robot assisted partial nephrectomy series (19.7 vs 28.4 minutes, p <0.0001). Subset analysis based on complexity revealed that tumor complexity had no effect on operative time or estimated blood loss for robot assisted partial nephrectomy, although complexity did affect these factors for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. In addition, for simple and complex tumors robot assisted partial nephrectomy provided significantly shorter warm ischemic time than laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (15.3 vs 25.2 minutes for simple, p <0.0001; 25.9 vs 36.7 minutes for complex, p = 0.0002). There were no intraoperative complications during robot assisted partial nephrectomy vs 1 complication during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Postoperative complication rates were similar for robot assisted and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (8.6% vs 10.2%). CONCLUSIONS Robot assisted partial nephrectomy is a safe and viable alternative to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, providing equivalent early oncological outcomes and comparable morbidity to a traditional laparoscopic approach. Moreover robot assisted partial nephrectomy appears to offer the advantages of decreased hospital stay as well as significantly less intraoperative blood loss and shorter warm ischemia time, the latter of which may help to provide maximal preservation of renal reserve. In addition, operative parameters for robot assisted partial nephrectomy appear to be less affected by tumor complexity compared to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Interestingly while the advantages of robotic surgery have historically been believed to aid laparoscopic naïve surgeons, these data indicate that robot assisted partial nephrectomy may also benefit experienced laparoscopic surgeons.

Robotic Partial Nephrectomy with Sliding-Clip Renorrhaphy: Technique and Outcomes

BACKGROUND Robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is emerging as an alternative to traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). Despite the potential advantages of the robotic approach, renorrhaphy remains a challenging portion of the procedure. OBJECTIVE To present our technique and outcomes for RPN, including sliding-clip renorrhaphy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Between 2007 and 2008, 50 patients underwent RPN performed by a single attending surgeon. SURGICAL PROCEDURE In this paper, we describe our technique for RPN, including a sliding-clip renorrhaphy, which is distinguished by the use of Weck Hem-O-Lock clips that are slid into place under complete control of the surgeon seated at the console and secured with a LapraTy clip. For the first 13 procedures, traditional tied-suture or assistant-placed clip closures were performed; sliding-clip renorrhaphy was performed in the remaining 37 cases. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Mean tumor size was 2.5 cm. Mean operative time was 145.3 min, and mean overall warm ischemia time was 17.8 min. Mean estimated blood loss was 140.3 ml. The learning curve for overall operative time was 19 cases; the learning curve for portions of the case performed under warm ischemia (including tumor resection and renorrhaphy) was 26 cases. The introduction of a sliding-clip renorrhaphy produced significant reductions in overall operative time and warm ischemia time, while blood loss and hospital stay remained stable over our experience. Limitations of RPN include cost and increased reliance on the bedside assistant. CONCLUSIONS Sliding-clip renorrhaphy provides an efficient and effective repair that is under nearly complete control of the surgeon. This technique appears to contribute to significantly shorter overall operative times and, perhaps most critically, to shorter warm ischemia times. The learning curve for RPN using this technique appears to be foreshortened compared with LPN.

Robotic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: single-surgeon analysis of >100 consecutive procedures.

OBJECTIVES To compare a single-surgeon experience of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) in 102 consecutive patients. METHODS The clinical, pathologic, and follow-up information from 102 consecutive procedures (40 RPNs and 62 LPNs) was reviewed. RESULTS No statistically significant differences were found between the groups with regard to age, body mass index, or American Society of Anesthesiologists score. No significant difference was found between the estimated blood loss (136 vs 173 mL), tumor size (2.5 vs 2.4 cm), need for pelvicaliceal repair (56% for both), and positive margin rate (1 vs 1 patient) between RPN and LPN, respectively. The mean total number of trocars in the robotic group was greater than the laparoscopic group (4.6 vs 3.2, P = .01). The mean total operative time (140 vs 156 minutes, P = .04), warm ischemia time (19 vs 25 minutes, P = .03), and length of stay (2.5 vs 2.9 days, P = .03) were significantly shorter for RPN than for LPN, respectively. CONCLUSIONS RPN can produce results comparable to LPN but has disadvantages, such as cost and assistant control of the renal hilum. Additional randomized trials are needed.

Outcomes of Metallic Stents for Malignant Ureteral Obstruction

PURPOSE Malignant ureteral obstruction often necessitates chronic urinary diversion and is associated with high rates of failure with traditional ureteral stents. We evaluated the outcomes of a metallic stent placed for malignant ureteral obstruction and determined the impact of risk factors previously associated with increased failure rates of traditional stents. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients undergoing placement of the metallic Resonance® stent for malignant ureteral obstruction at an academic referral center were identified retrospectively. Stent failure was defined as unplanned stent exchange or nephrostomy tube placement for signs or symptoms of recurrent ureteral obstruction (recurrent hydroureteronephrosis or increasing creatinine). Predictors of time to stent failure were assessed using Cox regression. RESULTS A total of 37 stents were placed in 25 patients with malignant ureteral obstruction. Of these stents 12 (35%) were identified to fail. Progressive hydroureteronephrosis and increasing creatinine were the most common signs of stent failure. Three failed stents had migrated distally and no stents required removal for recurrent infection. Patients with evidence of prostate cancer invading the bladder at stent placement were found to have a significantly increased risk of failure (HR 6.50, 95% CI 1.45-29.20, p = 0.015). Notably symptomatic subcapsular hematomas were identified in 3 patients after metallic stent placement. CONCLUSIONS Failure rates with a metallic stent are similar to those historically observed with traditional polyurethane based stents in malignant ureteral obstruction. The invasion of prostate cancer in the bladder significantly increases the risk of failure. Patients should be counseled and observed for subcapsular hematoma formation with this device.

The role of nephron-sparing robotic surgery in the management of renal malignancy.

Purpose of review Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy is an emerging technique for the treatment of renal malignancy. Our aim is to review the initial reported experience with robotic partial nephrectomy, evaluating techniques, early outcomes, and potential advantages of the robotic approach over the traditional laparoscopic approach. Recent findings Early experience with robotic partial nephrectomy demonstrates good oncologic outcomes. Other parameters, such as operative time, blood loss, postoperative renal function, and hospital stay, appear to be at least equivalent to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. New techniques, including refined methods for renorrhaphy, have also been introduced which aim to simplify critical portions of the procedure, although vascular clamping still remains a challenging aspect of the procedure. The learning curve appears to be slight, even for surgeons without extensive laparoscopic experience. Summary Although long-term outcome data is presently lacking, the early experience with robotic partial nephrectomy shows promise. The technique should continue to evolve as it gains acceptance as an alternative to the traditional laparoscopic approach.

Determination of Patient Radiation Dose During Ureteroscopic Treatment of Urolithiasis Using a Validated Model

PURPOSE We measured organ specific radiation dose rates and determined effective dose rates during simulated ureteroscopy using a validated model. To calculate the effective dose, patients were exposed to ureteroscopic management of stones at our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS A validated anthropomorphic male phantom was placed on a fluoroscopy table and underwent simulated ureteroscopy. High sensitivity metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeters were placed at 20 organ sites in the phantom and used to measure organ specific radiation doses. These dose rates were multiplied by the appropriate tissue weighting factor and summed to calculate effective dose rates. Also, we retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients who underwent ureteroscopy at our institution. A total of 30 nonobese males with data on fluoroscopy time were included in analysis. The median effective dose was determined by multiplying median fluoroscopy time by the effective dose rate. RESULTS The skin entrance was exposed to the highest absorbed dose rate, followed by the small intestine (mean ± SD 0.3286 ± 0.0054 and 0.1882 ± 0.0194 mGy per second, respectively). The mean effective dose rate was 0.024 ± 0.0019 mSv per second. Median fluoroscopy time was 46.95 seconds (range 12.9 to 298.8). The median effective dose was 1.13 mSv (range 0.31 to 7.17). CONCLUSIONS The fluoroscopy used during ureteroscopy contributes to overall radiation exposure in patients with nephrolithiasis. Nonobese males are exposed to a median of 1.13 mSv during ureteroscopy, similar to that of abdominopelvic x-ray. More data are needed to determine clinical implications but urologists must be aware and decrease patient radiation during ureteroscopy.

Radiation Exposure in Urology: A Genitourinary Catalogue for Diagnostic Imaging

PURPOSE Computerized tomography use increased exponentially in the last 3 decades, and it is commonly used to evaluate many urological conditions. Ionizing radiation exposure from medical imaging is linked to the risk of malignancy. We measured the organ and calculated effective doses of different studies to determine whether the dose-length product method is an accurate estimation of radiation exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anthropomorphic male phantom validated for human organ dosimetry measurements was used to determine radiation doses. High sensitivity metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeters were placed at 20 organ locations to measure specific organ doses. For each study the phantom was scanned 3 times using our institutional protocols. Organ doses were measured and effective doses were calculated on dosimetry. Effective doses measured by a metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeter were compared to calculated effective doses derived from the dose-length product. RESULTS The mean±SD effective dose on dosimetry for stone protocol, chest and abdominopelvic computerized tomography, computerized tomography urogram and renal cell carcinoma protocol computerized tomography was 3.04±0.34, 4.34±0.27, 5.19±0.64, 9.73±0.71 and 11.42±0.24 mSv, respectively. The calculated effective dose for these studies Was 3.33, 2.92, 5.84, 9.64 and 10.06 mSv, respectively (p=0.8478). CONCLUSIONS The effective dose varies considerable for different urological computerized tomography studies. Renal stone protocol computerized tomography shows the lowest dose, and computerized tomography urogram and the renal cell carcinoma protocol accumulate the highest effective doses. The calculated effective dose derived from the dose-length product is a reasonable estimate of patient radiation exposure.

Organ-specific radiation dose rates and effective dose rates during percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Radiation exposure during medical procedures continues to be an increasing concern for physicians and patients. We determined organ-specific dose rates and calculated effective dose rates during right and left percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) using a validated phantom model. MATERIALS AND METHODS A validated anthropomorphic adult male phantom was placed prone on an operating room table. Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeters were placed at 20 organ locations in the model and were used to measure the organ dosages. A portable C-arm was used to provide continuous fluoroscopy for three 10 minute runs each to simulate a left and right PCNL. Organ dose rate (mGy/s) was determined by dividing organ dose by fluoroscopy time. The organ dose rates were multiplied by their tissue weighting factor and summed to determine effective dose rate (EDR) (mSv/s). Two-dimensional radiation distribution in the abdomen during a left-sided PCNL was visually determined using radiochromic film. RESULTS The EDR for a left PCNL was 0.021 mSv/s ± 0.0008. The EDR for a right PCNL was 0.014 mSv/s ± 0.0004. The skin entrance was exposed to the greatest amount of radiation during left and right PCNL, 0.24 mGy/s and 0.26 mGy/s, respectively. Radiochromic film demonstrates visually the nonuniform dose distribution as the x-ray beam enters through the skin from the radiation source. CONCLUSIONS The effective dose rate is higher for a left-sided PCNL compared with a right-sided PCNL. The distribution of radiation exposure during PCNL is not uniform. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term implications of these radiation doses during percutaneous stone removal.

Radiation exposure in the follow-up of patients with urolithiasis comparing digital tomosynthesis, non-contrast CT, standard KUB, and IVU.

OBJECTIVE To compare the effective doses (EDs) associated with imaging modalities for follow-up of patients with urolithiasis, including stone protocol non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT), kidney, ureter, and bladder radiograph (KUB), intravenous urogram (IVU), and digital tomosynthesis (DT). METHODS A validated Monte-Carlo simulation-based software PCXMC 2.0 (STUK) designed for estimation of patient dose from medical X-ray exposures was used to determine the ED for KUB, IVU (KUB scout plus three tomographic images), and DT (two scouts and one tomographic sweep). Simulations were performed using a two-dimensional stationary field onto the corresponding body area of the built-in digital phantom, with actual kVp, mAs, and geometrical parameters of the protocols. The ED for NCCT was determined using an anthropomorphic male phantom that was placed prone on a 64-slice GE Healthcare volume computed tomography (VCT) scanner. High-sensitivity metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors dosimeters were placed at 20 organ locations and used to measure organ radiation doses. RESULTS The ED for a stone protocol NCCT was 3.04±0.34 mSv. The ED for a KUB was 0.63 and 1.1 mSv for the additional tomographic film. The total ED for IVU was 3.93 mSv. The ED for DT performed with two scouts and one sweep (14.2°) was 0.83 mSv. CONCLUSIONS Among the different imaging modalities for follow-up of patients with urolithiasis, DT was associated with the least radiation exposure (0.83 mSv). This ED corresponds to a fifth of NCCT or IVU studies. Further studies are needed to demonstrate the sensitivity and specificity of DT for the follow-up of nephrolithiasis patients.

Obesity Triples the Radiation Dose of Stone Protocol Computerized Tomography

PURPOSE Patients with recurrent nephrolithiasis are often evaluated and followed with computerized tomography. Obesity is a risk factor for nephrolithiasis. We evaluated the radiation dose of computerized tomography in obese and nonobese adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS We scanned a validated, anthropomorphic male phantom according to our institutional renal stone evaluation protocol. The obese model consisted of the phantom wrapped in 2 Custom Fat Layers (CIRS, Norfolk, Virginia), which have been verified to have the same radiographic tissue density as fat. High sensitivity metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeters were placed at 20 organ locations in the phantoms to measure organ specific radiation doses. The nonobese and obese models have an approximate body mass index of 24 and 30 kg/m(2), respectively. Three runs of renal stone protocol computerized tomography were performed on each phantom under automatic tube current modulation. Organ specific absorbed doses were measured and effective doses were calculated. RESULTS The bone marrow of each model received the highest dose and the skin received the second highest dose. The mean ± SD effective dose for the nonobese and obese models was 3.04 ± 0.34 and 10.22 ± 0.50 mSv, respectively (p <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS The effective dose of stone protocol computerized tomography in obese patients is more than threefold higher than the dose in nonobese patients using automatic tube current modulation. The implication of this finding extends beyond the urological stone population and adds to our understanding of radiation exposure from medical imaging.