TY - JOUR
T1 - Robot-assisted retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy
T2 - Comparison of the 3-arm and 4-arm method
AU - Lim, Chye Yang
AU - Lee, Kau Han
AU - Huang, Kuan Hua
AU - Liu, Chien Liang
AU - Chiu, Allen
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Urological Science | Published by Wolters Kluwer-Medknow.
PY - 2018/7/1
Y1 - 2018/7/1
N2 - Objective: To compare the results from 3-arm and 4-arm robot assisted retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy (RARPN) in our initial case series in terms of oncologic and functional outcomes. Patients and Methods: 35 RARPN performed for malignant small renal masses in our hospital were categorized by the method used, 3-arm or 4-arm. Patient demographics (age, body mass index, tumor size, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score, tumor location), perioperative outcomes (operative time, warm ischemic time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, surgical margin status, complications, pathology) and functional outcomes (pre and post operative renal function change) were compared. Results: Initial 14 cases were performed in 3-arm method while latter 21 cases performed in 4-arm method. The tumor size was larger in the 4-arm group (3.5 cm vs 2.3 cm, P = 0.0261) but the warm ischemic time was significant shorter in 4-arm group (17 mins vs 23 mins, P = 0.0093). There were no other significant differences in remaining patient demographics, perioperative outcomes and functional outcomes. Conclusion: 4-arm RARPN is a safe, feasible technique in treating malignant small renal masses even the tumor is located at anterior portion as it provides good traction and exposure on surgical field, thus reducing the warm ischemic time.
AB - Objective: To compare the results from 3-arm and 4-arm robot assisted retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy (RARPN) in our initial case series in terms of oncologic and functional outcomes. Patients and Methods: 35 RARPN performed for malignant small renal masses in our hospital were categorized by the method used, 3-arm or 4-arm. Patient demographics (age, body mass index, tumor size, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score, tumor location), perioperative outcomes (operative time, warm ischemic time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, surgical margin status, complications, pathology) and functional outcomes (pre and post operative renal function change) were compared. Results: Initial 14 cases were performed in 3-arm method while latter 21 cases performed in 4-arm method. The tumor size was larger in the 4-arm group (3.5 cm vs 2.3 cm, P = 0.0261) but the warm ischemic time was significant shorter in 4-arm group (17 mins vs 23 mins, P = 0.0093). There were no other significant differences in remaining patient demographics, perioperative outcomes and functional outcomes. Conclusion: 4-arm RARPN is a safe, feasible technique in treating malignant small renal masses even the tumor is located at anterior portion as it provides good traction and exposure on surgical field, thus reducing the warm ischemic time.
KW - Partial nephrectomy
KW - retroperitoneoscopic
KW - robot
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050720816&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4103/UROS.UROS-28-18
DO - 10.4103/UROS.UROS-28-18
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85050720816
SN - 1879-5226
VL - 29
SP - 193
EP - 197
JO - Urological Science
JF - Urological Science
IS - 4
ER -