Comparison of single-port versus multi-port robotic assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Abstract

The safety and efficacy of single-port and multi-port robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (SP-RAPN and MP-RAPN, respectively) were assessed for treating partial nephrectomy in this study. A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was conducted up to June 2024 to compare studies on SP-RAPN and MP-RAPN. Primary outcomes included perioperative results, complications, and oncological outcomes. Eight studies involving 1014 patients were analyzed. For binary outcomes, comparisons were performed using odds ratios (OR), and for continuous variables, weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The search failed to discover significant meaningful variations in operating times (p = 0.54), off-clamp procedure (P = 0.36), blood loss (p = 0.31), positive surgical margins (PSMs) (p = 0.78), or major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3) (p = 0.68) between SP-RAPN and MP-RAPN. However, shorter hospital stays (WMD - 0.26 days, 95% CI - 0.36 to - 0.15; p < 0.00001) and longer warm ischemia times (WIT) (WMD 3.13 min, 95% CI 0.81-5.46; p = 0.008) were related to SP-RAPN, and higher transfusion rate (OR 2.99, 95% CI 1.31-6.80; p = 0.009) compared to MP-RAPN. SP-RAPN performed better in terms of hospital stay but had slightly higher rates of transfusion, off-clamp procedures, and warm ischemia time (WIT) compared to MP-RAPN. As an emerging technology, preliminary research suggests that SP-RAPN is a feasible and safe method for carrying out a nephrectomy partial. However, compared to MP-RAPN, it shows inferior outcomes regarding (WIT) and transfusion rates.