Humberto Laydner

Comparative Outcomes and Assessment of Trifecta in 500 Robotic and Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy Cases: A Single Surgeon Experience

PURPOSE We report a comparative analysis of a large series of laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomies performed by a high volume single surgeon at a tertiary care institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the medical charts of 500 patients treated with minimally invasive partial nephrectomy by a single surgeon between March 2002 and February 2012. Demographic and perioperative data were collected and statistically analyzed. R.E.N.A.L. (radius, exophytic/endophytic properties, nearness of tumor to the collecting system or sinus in mm, anterior/posterior and location relative to polar lines) nephrometry score was used to score tumors. Those scored as moderate and high complexity were designated as complex. Trifecta was defined as a combination of warm ischemia time less than 25 minutes, negative surgical margins and no perioperative complications. RESULTS Two groups were identified, including 261 patients with robotic and 231 with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Demographics were similar in the groups. The robotic group was significantly more morbid (Charlson comorbidity index 3.75 vs 1.26), included more complex tumors (R.E.N.A.L. score 5.98 vs 7.2), and had lower operative (169.9 vs 191.7 minutes) and warm ischemia (17.9 vs 25.2 minutes) time, intraoperative (2.6% vs 5.6%, each p <0.001) and postoperative (24.53% vs 32.03%, p = 0.004) complications, and positive margin rate (2.9% vs 5.6%, p <0.001). Thus, a higher overall trifecta rate was observed for robotic partial nephrectomy (58.7% vs 31.6%, p <0.001). The laparoscopic group had longer followup (3.43 vs 1.51 years, p <0.001) and no significant difference in postoperative changes in renal function. Main study limitations were the retrospective nature, arbitrary definition of trifecta and shorter followup in the RPN group. CONCLUSIONS Our large comparative analysis shows that robotic partial nephrectomy offers a wider range of indications, better operative outcomes and lower perioperative morbidity than laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Overall, the quest for trifecta seems to be better accomplished by robotic partial nephrectomy, which is likely to become the new standard for minimally invasive partial nephrectomy.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for Complex Tumors: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes

BACKGROUND Recent studies showed that robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) offered outcomes at least comparable to those of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). LPN can be particularly challenging for more complex tumors. OBJECTIVE To compare the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing LPN or RPN for a single renal mass of moderate or high complexity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective analysis was performed for 381 consecutive patients who underwent either LPN (n = 182) or RPN (n = 199) between 2005 and 2011 for a complex renal mass (RENAL score ≥ 7). Perioperative outcomes were compared. Predictors of postoperative renal function were assessed using multivariable linear regression analysis. INTERVENTION LPN or RPN. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Perioperative outcomes were compared. Predictors of postoperative renal function were assessed using multivariable linear regression analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to patient age, gender, side, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), or tumor size. Patients undergoing LPN had a slightly lower body mass index (29.2 kg/m(2) compared with 30.7 kg/m(2), p = 0.02) and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (81.1 compared with 86.0 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), p = 0.02). LPN was associated with an increased rate of conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN) (11.5% compared with 1%, p<0.001) and a higher decrease in percentage of eGFR (-16.0% compared with -12.6%, p = 0.03). There were no significant differences with respect to warm ischemia time (WIT), estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, or postoperative complications. WIT, preoperative eGFR, and CCI were found to be predictors of postoperative eGFR in multivariable analysis. No difference in perioperative outcomes was found between moderate and high RENAL score subgroups. The retrospective study design was the main limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS RPN provides functional outcomes comparable to those of LPN for moderate- to high-complexity tumors, but with a significantly lower risk of conversion to RN. This situation is likely because of the technical advantages offered by the articulated robotic instruments. A prospective randomized study is needed to confirm these findings.

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT Recent advances in technology have led to the implementation of mini- and micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) as well as retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in the management of kidney stones. OBJECTIVE To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing RIRS with PCNL techniques for the treatment of kidney stones. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature review was performed in March 2014 using the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing standard PCNL and minimally invasive percutaneous procedures (MIPPs) including mini-PCNL and micro-PCNL with RIRS, separately. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Two randomised and eight nonrandomised studies were analysed. PCNL techniques provided a significantly higher stone-free rate (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-3.13; p<0.00001) but also higher complication rates (odds ratio [OR]: 1.61; 95% CI, 1.11-2.35; p<0.01) and a larger postoperative decrease in haemoglobin levels (WMD: 0.87; 95% CI, 0.51-1.22; p<0.00001). In contrast, RIRS led to a shorter hospital stay (WMD: 1.28; 95% CI, 0.79-1.77; p<0.0001). At subgroup analysis, RIRS provided a significantly higher stone-free rate than MIPPs (WMD: 1.70; 95% CI, 1.07-2.70; p=0.03) but less than standard PCNL (OR: 4.32; 95% CI, 1.99-9.37; p=0.0002). Hospital stay was shorter for RIRS compared with both MIPPs (WMD: 1.11; 95% CI, 0.39-1.83; p=0.003) and standard PCNL (WMD: 1.84 d; 95% CI, 0.64-3.04; p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS PCNL is associated with higher stone-free rates at the expense of higher complication rates, blood loss, and admission times. Standard PCNL offers stone-free rates superior to those of RIRS, whereas RIRS provides higher stone free rates than MIPPs. Given the added morbidity and lower efficacy of MIPPs, RIRS should be considered standard therapy for stones <2 cm until appropriate randomised studies are performed. When flexible instruments are not available, standard PCNL should be considered due to the lower efficacy of MIPPs. PATIENT SUMMARY We searched the literature for studies comparing new minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of kidney stones. The analysis of 10 available studies shows that treatment can be tailored to the patient by balancing the advantages and disadvantages of each technique.

Robotic versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. OBJECTIVE To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 3.01 to -1.74; p<0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p=0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39-1.75; p=0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, -6.02 to 17.79; p=0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: -0.43; 95% CI, -0.56 to -0.30; p<0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: -18.21; 95% CI, -29.11 to -7.32; p=0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.00; p=0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT. CONCLUSIONS Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses.

Robotic Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Radical Nephrectomy: Surgical Technique and Comparative Outcomes

BACKGROUND Recent reports have suggested that robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (R-LESS) is feasible, yet comparative studies to conventional laparoscopy are lacking. OBJECTIVE To report our early experience with R-LESS radical nephrectomy (RN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective review of R-LESS RN data was performed between May 2008 and November 2010. A total of 10 procedures were performed and subsequently matched to 10 conventional laparoscopic RN procedures (controls). The control group was matched with respect to patient age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists score, surgical indication, and tumor size. SURGICAL PROCEDURE R-LESS RN was performed using methods outlined in the manuscript and supplemental video material. All patients underwent R-LESS RN by a single surgeon. Single-port access was achieved via two commercially available multichannel ports, and robotic trocars were inserted either through separate fascial stabs or through the port, depending on the type used. The da Vinci S and da Vinci-Si Surgical Systems (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) with pediatric and standard instruments were used. MEASUREMENTS Preoperative, perioperative, pathologic, and functional outcomes data were analyzed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The mean patient age was 64.0 yr of age for both groups, and BMI was 29.2 kg/m(2). There was no difference between R-LESS and conventional laparoscopy cases in median operative time, estimated blood loss, visual analogue scale, or complication rate. The R-LESS group had a lower median narcotic requirement during hospital admission (25.3 morphine equivalents vs 37.5 morphine equivalents; p=0.049) and a shorter length of stay (2.5 d vs 3.0 d; p=0.03). Study limitations include the small sample size, short follow-up period, and all the inherent biases introduced by a retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS R-LESS RN offers comparable perioperative outcomes to conventional laparoscopic RN. Prospective comparison is needed to definitively establish the position of R-LESS in minimally invasive urologic surgery.

252 Robotic Partial Nephrectomies: Evolving Renorrhaphy Technique and Surgical Outcomes at a Single Institution

OBJECTIVE To describe the evolution of robotic partial nephrectomy (PN) technique and to analyze the surgical outcomes in a large single institution experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective review of our institutional review board-approved, prospectively maintained, minimally invasive PN database yielded 252 robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) procedures from June 2007 to October 2010. Our initial experience, adopted from our laparoscopic PN approach included a standard interrupted bolstered renorrhaphy, whereas our contemporary experience included a nonbolstered continuous horizontal mattress stitch for the capsular closure. Perioperative results were evaluated depending on renorrhaphy technique, length of warm ischemia time, and nephrometry scores. RESULTS Overall, mean tumor size was 3.1 ± 1.6 cm, operative time 190 ± 56 minutes, warm ischemia time 18.2 ± 9.4 minutes, and estimated blood loss 267 ± 275 mL. Significantly better outcomes were noted in the contemporary experience in terms of transfusion rate (8.2% vs 21.9%, P <.001), operative time (181 vs 219 minutes, P <.001), hospital stay (3.6 vs 4.3 days, P = .02), and complication rate (14.4% vs 33.8%, P <.01). Increasing tumor complexity based on RENAL score predicted longer operative time (P <.0001), warm ischemia time (P <.0001), and hospital stay (P <.04), and a greater risk of postoperative complications (P = .003). Of the series, only 2 patients had hemorrhagic complications (0.8%) requiring angioembolization, 4 patients developed urine leaks (1.5%), and 2 positive margins (0.8%) were noted. CONCLUSION We report the largest single-institution study with RPN to date. Despite it being a relatively nascent procedure, initial results suggest that RPN is an effective approach for minimally invasive nephron-sparing surgery. As experience is gained and the technique for RPN evolves, further improvement in outcomes will be noted.

Three-year Oncologic and Renal Functional Outcomes After Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy

BACKGROUND With the wider adoption of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (PN), intermediate- and long-term outcomes data are needed to make firm conclusions about oncologic and functional efficacy, especially for robot-assisted PN (RPN). OBJECTIVE To report intermediate-term oncologic and renal functional outcomes of RPN. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We performed a chart review of patients who had undergone RPN since June 2006; patients with a minimum of 2 yr of follow-up were included in this study. Length of follow-up was calculated from the date of surgery to the date of last clinical follow-up. Patients who were either lost to follow-up or who had follow-up outside of our center were sent surveys. INTERVENTION Transperitoneal RPN with or without hilar clamping. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data were statistically analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and cancer-free survival (CFS). Upstaging of chronic kidney disease (CKD) was calculated, as well. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to show predicting factors for the latest estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 427 patients, 134 had a minimum follow-up of 2 yr, and 70 had a minimum of 3-6 yr of follow-up. The mean age was 59.1±12.5 yr, body mass index (BMI) was 29.8±6.2 kg/m(2), and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score was 4.2±1.6. The mean tumor size on computed tomography (CT) scan was 3.0±1.6 cm, RENAL score was 7.2±1.8, estimated blood loss (EBL) was 270.7±291.9 ml, operative time was 189.1±54.8 min, and warm ischemia time (WIT) was 17.9±10.3 min. A total of two intraoperative complications (1.5%) and five high-grade Clavien complications (3.7%) occurred. Patients stayed on average for 3.7±1.7 d in the hospital, and the average follow-up was 3.0±0.9 yr. OS was 97.01% at 3 yr and 90.20% at 5 yr; CFS was 98.92% at 3 yr and 98.92% at 5 yr; and CSS was 99.04%, as projected by the Kaplan-Meier method. The mean preoperative GFR was 88.2±0.8 ml/min per 1.73 m(2); the latest postoperative GFR was 80±24 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), with a 8±17.4% change. There was a 20.2% upstaging of CKD postoperatively, but no patients started dialysis. CONCLUSIONS This study reaffirms that RPN is effective in renal function preservation and oncologic control at an intermediate follow-up interval.

Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cryoablation for the Small Renal Mass

BACKGROUND Open partial nephrectomy (OPN) remains the gold standard for treatment of small renal masses (SRMs). Laparoscopic cryoablation (LCA) has provided encouraging outcomes. Robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) represents a new promising option but is still under evaluation. OBJECTIVE Compare the outcomes of RPN and LCA in the treatment of patients with SRMs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We retrospectively analyzed the medical charts of patients with SRMs (≤4cm) who underwent minimally invasive nephron-sparing surgery (RPN or LCA) in our institution from January 1998 to December 2010. INTERVENTION RPN and LCA. MEASUREMENTS Perioperative complications and functional and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS A total of 446 SRMs were identified in 436 patients (RPN, n=210; LCA, n=226). Patients undergoing RPN were younger (p<0.0001), had a lower American Society of Anesthesiologists score (p<0.001), and higher baseline preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (p<0.0001). Mean tumor size was smaller in the LCA group (2.2 vs 2.4cm; p=0.004). RPN was associated with longer operative time (180 vs 165min; p=0.01), increased estimated blood loss (200 vs 75ml; p<0.0001), longer hospital stay (72 vs 48h; p<0.0001), and higher morbidity rate (20% vs 12%, p=0.015). Mean follow-ups for RPN and LCA were 4.8 mo and 44.5 mo, respectively (p<0.0001). Local recurrence rates for RPN and LCA were 0% and 11%, respectively (p<0.0001). Mean eGFR decrease after RPN and LCA was insignificant at 1 mo, at 6 mo after surgery, and during last follow-up. Limitations include retrospective study design, length of follow-up, and selection bias. CONCLUSIONS Both techniques remain viable treatment options in the management of SRMs. A higher incidence of perioperative complications was found in patients undergoing RPN. However, the technique was not predictive of the occurrence of postoperative complications. Early oncologic outcomes are promising for RPN, which also seems to be associated with better preservation of renal function. Long-term follow-up and well-designed prospective comparative studies are awaited to corroborate these findings.

Clinically insignificant residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: medium-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Clinically insignificant residual fragments (CIRFs), defined as asymptomatic, noninfectious, ≤4  mm fragments, are sometimes observed after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Because the natural history of these fragments is unclear, we investigated the medium-term outcome of these fragments. PATIENTS AND METHODS During a 3-year period, 430 patients underwent PCNL. Overall stone-free rate was 74.5%, and CIRFs were encountered in 22% of cases 3 months after surgery. A total of 38 patients who had CIRFs immediately after PCNL with at least 24 months of follow-up were included in the study. All patients were subjected to periodic follow-up with detailed history, clinical examination, and radiographic follow-up. Serum biochemistry together with urine metabolic evaluation was also performed. RESULTS The median follow-up was 28.4±5.3 months (range 24-38  mos). Ten (26.3%) patients had a symptomatic episode that necessitated medical therapy during follow-up while others remained asymptomatic. Radiologic assessment showed an increase in the size of the fragments in 8 (21.1%) patients, while the size of the fragments was stable or decreased in 27 (71.1%) cases. Three (7.9%) patients had spontaneous stone passage. Metabolic evaluation revealed abnormalities in 10 (26.3%) patients. Stone analysis revealed magnesium ammonium phosphate in three of eight patients who had an increase in residual fragment size. Also, only two of these eight patients had a metabolic abnormality (one hypocitraturia and one hypercalciuria). CONCLUSION Medium-term follow-up of CIRFs after PCNL revealed that progression within 2 years is relatively common. Increase in fragment size is common in patients with struvite stones, and presence of risk factors on 24-hour urine metabolic analysis does not seem to predict growth of observed fragments.

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic and Laparoscopic Simple Prostatectomy: A European-American Multi-institutional Analysis

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic and robotic simple prostatectomy (SP) have been introduced with the aim of reducing the morbidity of the standard open technique. OBJECTIVE To report a large multi-institutional series of minimally invasive SP (MISP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Consecutive cases of MISP done for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) due to benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) between 2000 and 2014 at 23 participating institutions in the Americas and Europe were included in this retrospective analysis. INTERVENTION Laparoscopic or robotic SP. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Demographic data and main perioperative outcomes were gathered and analyzed. A multivariable analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with a favorable trifecta outcome, arbitrarily defined as a combination of the following postoperative events: International Prostate Symptom Score <8, maximum flow rate >15ml/s, and no perioperative complications. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Overall, 1330 consecutive cases were analyzed, including 487 robotic (36.6%) and 843 laparoscopic (63.4%) SP cases. Median overall prostate volume was 100ml (range: 89-128). Median estimated blood loss was 200ml (range: 150-300). An intraoperative transfusion was required in 3.5% of cases, an intraoperative complication was recorded in 2.2% of cases, and the conversion rate was 3%. Median length of stay was 4 d (range: 3-5). On pathology, prostate cancer was found in 4% of cases. Overall postoperative complication rate was 10.6%, mostly of low grade. At a median follow-up of 12 mo, a significant improvement was observed for subjective and objective indicators of BOO. Trifecta outcome was not significantly influenced by the type of procedure (robotic vs laparoscopic; p=0.136; odds ratio [OR]: 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-2.9), whereas operative time (p=0.01; OR: 0.9; 95% CI, 0.9-1.0) and estimated blood loss (p=0.03; OR: 0.9; 95% CI, 0.9-1.0) were the only two significant factors. Retrospective study design, lack of a control arm, and limited follow-up represent major limitations of the present analysis. CONCLUSIONS This study provides the largest outcome analysis reported for MISP for BOO/BPE. These findings confirm that SP can be safely and effectively performed in a minimally invasive fashion in a variety of healthcare settings in which specific surgical expertise and technology is available. MISP can be considered a viable surgical treatment in cases of large prostatic adenomas. The use of robotic technology for this indication can be considered in centers that have a robotic program in place for other urologic indications. PATIENT SUMMARY Analysis of a large data set from multiple institutions shows that surgical removal of symptomatic large prostatic adenomas can be carried out with good outcomes by using robot-assisted laparoscopy.