Hoeh, Benedikt;
Wenzel, Mike;
Eckart, Olivia;
Fleisgarten, Felicia;
Garcia, Cristina Cano;
Köllermann, Jens;
Würnschimmel, Christoph;
Larcher, Alessandro;
Karakiewicz, Pierre;
Kluth, Luis A.;
Chun, Felix K. H.;
Mandel, Philipp;
Becker, Andreas
Comparison of peri- and intraoperative outcomes of open vs robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a propensity-matched analysis
You can manage bookmarks using lists, please log in to your user account for this.
Media type:
E-Article
Title:
Comparison of peri- and intraoperative outcomes of open vs robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a propensity-matched analysis
Contributor:
Hoeh, Benedikt;
Wenzel, Mike;
Eckart, Olivia;
Fleisgarten, Felicia;
Garcia, Cristina Cano;
Köllermann, Jens;
Würnschimmel, Christoph;
Larcher, Alessandro;
Karakiewicz, Pierre;
Kluth, Luis A.;
Chun, Felix K. H.;
Mandel, Philipp;
Becker, Andreas
imprint:
Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2023
Description:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background</jats:title>
<jats:p>Partial nephrectomy (PN) is the gold standard surgical treatment for resectable renal cell carcinoma (RCC) tumors. However, the decision whether a robotic (RAPN) or open PN (OPN) approach is chosen is often based on the surgeon’s individual experience and preference. To overcome the inherent selection bias when comparing peri- and postoperative outcomes of RAPN vs. OPN, a strict statistical methodology is needed.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Materials and methods</jats:title>
<jats:p>We relied on an institutional tertiary-care database to identify RCC patients treated with RAPN and OPN between January 2003 and January 2021. Study endpoints were estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications, and trifecta. In the first step of analyses, descriptive statistics and multivariable regression models (MVA) were applied. In the second step of analyses, to validate initial findings, MVA were applied after 2:1 propensity-score matching (PSM).</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results</jats:title>
<jats:p>Of 615 RCC patients, 481 (78%) underwent OPN vs 134 (22%) RAPN. RAPN patients were younger and presented with a smaller tumor diameter and lower RENAL-Score sum, respectively. Median EBL was comparable, whereas LOS was shorter in RAPN vs. OPN. Both intraoperative (27 vs 6%) and Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications (11 vs 3%) were higher in OPN (both < 0.05), whereas achievement of trifecta was higher in RAPN (65 vs 54%; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.028). In MVA, RAPN was a significant predictor for shorter LOS, lower rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications as well as higher trifecta rates. After 2:1 PSM with subsequent MVA, RAPN remained a statistical and clinical predictor for lower rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications and higher rates of trifecta achievement but not LOS.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>
<jats:p>Differences in baseline and outcome characteristics exist between RAPN vs. OPN, probably due to selection bias. However, after applying two sets of statistical analyses, RAPN seems to be associated with more favorable outcomes regarding complications and trifecta rates.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>