Kamol Panumatrassamee

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.

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.

Transvaginal hybrid natural orifice transluminal surgery robotic donor nephrectomy: first clinical application.

OBJECTIVE To report a novel surgical approach of transvaginal hybrid natural orifice transluminal surgery (NOTES) living donor nephrectomy. We conceptualized this approach by incorporating 2 existing concepts: laparoendoscopic single-site surgery and NOTES. MATERIALS AND METHODS After thorough consent and under institutional review board approval, a 61-year-old woman volunteered to donate her kidney through hybrid transvaginal NOTES. Under general anesthesia, she was placed in a modified right lateral decubitus position. A SILS port and an 8-mm trocar were placed through the same umbilical incision. The GelPoint port was placed transvaginally via the posterior fornix, and the robot was docked. After dissection of the left kidney in preparation for extraction, the robot was undocked, and the retrieval bag was inserted through the GelPoint port. The graft was bagged before vessel stapling and extracted without breaching the bag. The kidney was delivered to the perfusion table with a clean pair of gloves without contamination with the bag exterior. RESULTS Donor nephrectomy was successfully completed without conversion or perioperative complications. The total operative time was 240 minutes, the warm ischemic time was 5.8 minutes, and the estimated blood loss was 75 mL. No complications occurred and extra ports were not needed. The patient was discharged after an uneventful 48-hour stay. Her creatinine was 1.0 mg/dL at 4 weeks of follow-up. The recipient was given pulse steroids for biopsy-proven acute rejection, and her serum creatinine was 1.16 mg/dL at 4 weeks postoperatively. CONCLUSION Transvaginal hybrid NOTES robotic donor nephrectomy is feasible. Additional advances in robotic technology are awaited for development of this approach and to foster its clinical application.

Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for tumor in a solitary kidney: A single institution comparative analysis

To compare the outcomes of robot‐assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumor in patients with a solitary kidney.

Cryoablation Versus Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy for Small Renal Masses in the Solitary Kidney: Impact of Approach on Functional Outcomes

PURPOSE We evaluated the change in renal function after renal cryoablation and partial nephrectomy based on tumor complexity according to the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who had a renal tumor in a solitary kidney, and underwent renal cryoablation and partial nephrectomy between December 2000 and January 2012. Renal tumor complexity was categorized into 3 groups by R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score as low (4 to 6), intermediate (7 to 9) and high (10 to 12). All baseline demographic data, perioperative parameters and followup data including renal function were collected. Comparisons were made among similar tumor complexities. RESULTS In the renal cryoablation and partial nephrectomy groups 29 patients (43 tumors) and 33 patients were identified, respectively. In all renal tumor complexities, renal cryoablation provided a better perioperative outcome in terms of median operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusion, hospital stay and complications. The median change in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate was slightly greater in the partial nephrectomy group. However, the differences were not statistically significant for any of the tumor complexities. Three patients (10%) in the renal cryoablation group and 2 (6%) in the partial nephrectomy group required long-term dialysis. CONCLUSIONS In patients with solitary kidneys, renal cryoablation is associated with superior perioperative outcomes compared to partial nephrectomy. Specifically, partial nephrectomy is not associated with greater loss of renal function than renal cryoablation regardless of the extent of tumor complexity.

Robot-Assisted Ureteroneocystostomy: Technique and Comparative Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Ureteroneocystostomy can be used for the treatment of patients with a wide variety of ureteral pathology. Over the last decade, robot-assisted surgery has become more commonly used as a minimally invasive approach for reconstructive upper urinary tract procedures. The aim of this study is to present our experience with robot-assisted ureteroneocystosctomy (RUNC) with a comparison with that of open ureteroneocystostomy (OUNC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Medical records of 25 patients who underwent RUNC and 41 patients who underwent OUNC or at our institution between 2000 and 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Perioperative and postoperative data including demographics, surgical outcomes, and clinical and radiographic findings at postoperative follow-up were considered in the comparative analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to present the data. The significance of the difference between variables was evaluated using the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous and Fisher exact test for categorical variables. RESULTS No significant differences were detected in terms of baseline patient characteristics between the two groups. The OUNC procedures were performed with a shorter median operative time (200 vs 279 min., P=0.0008), whereas RUNC patients had a shorter hospital stay (median 3 vs 5 days, P=0.0004), less narcotic pain requirement (morphine equivalent, mg 104.6 vs 290, P=0.0001), and less estimated blood loss (100 vs 150 mL, P=<0.0002). There as no significant difference in the rate of reoperation between groups: RUNC 2/25 (7.6 %) vs OUNC 4/41 (9.7%) P=0.8. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and the difference in indications for surgery. CONCLUSION RUNC provides excellent outcomes with shorter hospital stay, less narcotic pain requirement, and decreased blood loss when compared with the open procedure. Advantages of the robotic platform for dissection and suturing can be useful for complex minimally invasive urologic reconstructive procedures.

Perineal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in the cadaver model.

PURPOSE To evaluate the feasibility of perineal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (P-RALP) in the cadaver model. METHODS The prostate was assessed by ultrasonography and cystoscopy in the lithotomy position. After incision and subcutaneous dissection, a single-port device was placed and the robot was docked. The rectourethralis muscle was divided and the levator ani fibers were split. The Denonvilliers fascia was incised and the posterior prostate and seminal vesicles were dissected. The apex was dissected and the urethra was transected. The anterior and lateral planes were dissected and the prostate pedicles were clipped. The prostate was freed from the bladder neck and the vesicourethral anastomosis was performed. The robot was undocked and the wound was sutured in layers. Cystoscopy confirmed integrity of the anastomosis. The specimen was sent for histopathology examination. RESULTS Nerve-sparing P-RALP was successfully completed in three cadavers. Median time for setting was 23 minutes. Time for posterior dissection was 15 minutes. Dissection of the apex and section of the urethra took 9 minutes. Time for anterolateral dissection was 14 minutes. Time for bladder neck dissection was 7 minutes. Vesicourethral anastomosis took 8 minutes. Total operative time was 89 minutes. The prostate capsule was grossly intact and histopathology examination was negative for prostatic tissue in all distal urethral sections and in two of three bladder neck sections. CONCLUSIONS P-RALP is feasible in the cadaver. Future studies should evaluate the feasibility of lymph node dissection through the same incision, clinical feasibility, and prospective comparisons with standard techniques.

Laparoendoscopic single-site nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: outcomes of an international multi-institutional study of 101 patients

LESS‐NU may be an alternative minimally‐invasive treatment option for patients eligible to undergo laparoscopic surgery for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. The true benefits of LESS‐NU remain to be determined and require randomized control trials in the future. Despite encouraging early findings, clinical trials still are warranted before this procedure is adopted widely, and longer follow‐up is needed to determine its oncological durability.

Robot-assisted Transrectal Hybrid Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery Nephrectomy and Adrenalectomy: Initial Investigation in a Cadaver Model

OBJECTIVE To assess the feasibility of robotic transrectal hybrid natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy and adrenalectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A male cadaver was used for the present investigation and placed in lithotomy position. An 8- and 12-mm port was inserted through the same periumbilical skin incision. An incision was then created in the rectum 1 cm above the pectinate line, and a submucosal tunnel was developed, through which a robotic 8-mm port was inserted under vision. The cadaver was then placed in the right side up, flank position. The laparoscope and the right robot instrument were introduced through the umbilicus while the left robot instrument was introduced through the rectal port aiding the peri-umbilical ports in kidney and adrenal dissection. After completion of the nephrectomy, the kidney was placed in a specimen bag and extracted intact through the rectum. Closure of the rectal incision was accomplished extracorporeally using 2 suture layers. RESULTS Robotic transrectal hybrid NOTES nephrectomy and adrenalectomy were completed successfully. The total operative time was 145 minutes, of which the access and robotic docking required 20 minutes. Kidney dissection and hilar control was achieved within 60 minutes. Right adrenalectomy, specimen extraction, and rectal closure was completed in 15, 30, and 20 minutes, respectively. CONCLUSION We report the first investigation of a robot-assisted transrectal hybrid NOTES nephrectomy and adrenalectomy in a cadaver model to assess the range of motion and articulation of the robotic platform. Additional investigations in live animal model are needed to evaluate the safety of the transrectal approach.

Defining heminephrectomy for cancer.

473 Background: The word heminephrectomy originally referred to the removal of half of a kidney with a duplicated collecting system. In the era of partial nephrectomies, heminephrectomy is sometimes used to describe the removal for tumor of >30% of the parenchyma of a non-duplicated kidney. We herein propose a new definition of heminephrectomy: excision of the upper or lower pole of the kidney, removing at least 30% of the parenchymal mass, cutting to hilar fat, and transecting the collecting system. METHODS Our institutional database of robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomies was queried for patients who underwent a partial nephrectomy for tumor between 2002 and 2011. Patients who had a heminephrectomy for obstruction in a duplicated collecting system were excluded. The patients who had a heminephrectomy by our strict definition were compared to the remainder of patients who had a partial nephrectomy. Logistic regression was used to compare outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS 61 patients met our strict definition of heminephrectomy out of 643 patients who underwent a partial nephrectomy for tumor. Heminephrectomy and non-heminephrectomy patients were similar in age, gender, BMI, ASA score, proportion of left- versus right-sided tumors, solitary kidney status, preoperative creatinine and GFR. (all p>0.1). The tumors in the heminephrectomy group were larger (5.1 vs. 2.8 cm, p<0.001) and had a higher R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score (8.5 vs. 6.5, p<0.001). Operative outcomes reflected the high complexity of performing a heminephrectomy. Estimated blood loss was greater (373 vs. 267 ml, p=0.04), operative time was longer (214 vs. 185 minutes, p<0.001), warm ischemia time was longer (25 vs. 20 minutes, p=0.002), and the rate of intra-operative complications was greater (11% vs. 4%, p=0.02) in the heminephrectomy group. On multivariable analysis adjusted for age, preoperative GFR, R.E.N.A.L. score, and warm ischemia time, heminephrectomy was a significant predictor of lower post-operative GFR (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Our strict definition of heminephrectomy performed for tumor in a non-duplicated system will allow precise clinical and research communication about heminephrectomy patients and may aid in the prediction of outcomes after partial nephrectomy.