Tuan Thanh Nguyen, Khac Chuan Hoang, Trong Tri Tran, Le Quy Van Dinh, Xuan Thai Ngo
{"title":"Experience of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors: Functional and Oncologic Outcomes.","authors":"Tuan Thanh Nguyen, Khac Chuan Hoang, Trong Tri Tran, Le Quy Van Dinh, Xuan Thai Ngo","doi":"10.14740/wjon2791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence comparing outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) between small and larger malignant renal tumors remains limited, particularly in real-world single-center practice. We aimed to compare perioperative, renal functional, and oncologic outcomes of RAPN according to tumor size and to evaluate predictors of trifecta achievement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study of 74 patients undergoing transperitoneal RAPN for malignant renal tumors, including 42 patients with T1a tumors (≤ 4 cm) and 32 with tumors > 4 cm. Baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, renal functional outcomes, and oncologic outcomes were compared between groups. Trifecta was assessed using an exploratory parsimonious multivariable logistic regression model including tumor size group, RENAL complexity, hilar anatomy complexity, and age, given the limited sample size and event counts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with the T1a group, patients with tumors > 4 cm had significantly higher RENAL scores and a greater proportion of highly complex tumors. Operative time was longer (252.1 vs. 226.3 min, P = 0.030), and hospital stay was longer (median 6 vs. 5 days, P = 0.040). No statistically significant differences were observed in warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, complication rates, positive surgical margin rates, or trifecta achievement (43.8% vs. 50.0%, P = 0.765), although the study may have been underpowered to detect clinically meaningful differences. Absolute estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in the > 4 cm group at 3, 6, and 12 months, but eGFR preservation percentages and chronic kidney disease (CKD) upstaging rates did not differ significantly. On exploratory multivariable analysis, tumor size > 4 cm was not independently associated with trifecta achievement (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28-2.26, P = 0.673), and no statistically significant independent predictor was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RAPN for tumors > 4 cm was associated with greater anatomical complexity and modestly increased operative burden. No statistically significant differences were observed in ischemic, complication, oncologic, or relative renal functional outcomes, although these comparisons should be interpreted cautiously because the study may have been underpowered for uncommon events. These findings support the feasibility of RAPN for selected larger malignant renal tumors in a real-world single-center setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":46797,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Oncology","volume":"17 4","pages":"588-597"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13375410/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon2791","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Evidence comparing outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) between small and larger malignant renal tumors remains limited, particularly in real-world single-center practice. We aimed to compare perioperative, renal functional, and oncologic outcomes of RAPN according to tumor size and to evaluate predictors of trifecta achievement.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study of 74 patients undergoing transperitoneal RAPN for malignant renal tumors, including 42 patients with T1a tumors (≤ 4 cm) and 32 with tumors > 4 cm. Baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, renal functional outcomes, and oncologic outcomes were compared between groups. Trifecta was assessed using an exploratory parsimonious multivariable logistic regression model including tumor size group, RENAL complexity, hilar anatomy complexity, and age, given the limited sample size and event counts.
Results: Compared with the T1a group, patients with tumors > 4 cm had significantly higher RENAL scores and a greater proportion of highly complex tumors. Operative time was longer (252.1 vs. 226.3 min, P = 0.030), and hospital stay was longer (median 6 vs. 5 days, P = 0.040). No statistically significant differences were observed in warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, complication rates, positive surgical margin rates, or trifecta achievement (43.8% vs. 50.0%, P = 0.765), although the study may have been underpowered to detect clinically meaningful differences. Absolute estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in the > 4 cm group at 3, 6, and 12 months, but eGFR preservation percentages and chronic kidney disease (CKD) upstaging rates did not differ significantly. On exploratory multivariable analysis, tumor size > 4 cm was not independently associated with trifecta achievement (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28-2.26, P = 0.673), and no statistically significant independent predictor was identified.
Conclusions: RAPN for tumors > 4 cm was associated with greater anatomical complexity and modestly increased operative burden. No statistically significant differences were observed in ischemic, complication, oncologic, or relative renal functional outcomes, although these comparisons should be interpreted cautiously because the study may have been underpowered for uncommon events. These findings support the feasibility of RAPN for selected larger malignant renal tumors in a real-world single-center setting.
背景:机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RAPN)在小肿瘤和较大恶性肾肿瘤之间的疗效比较证据仍然有限,特别是在现实世界的单中心实践中。我们的目的是根据肿瘤大小比较RAPN的围手术期、肾功能和肿瘤学结果,并评估三合一实现的预测因素。方法:对74例恶性肾肿瘤行经腹膜RAPN患者进行回顾性单中心队列研究,其中T1a(≤4cm)患者42例,> ~ 4cm患者32例。组间比较基线特征、围手术期结局、肾功能结局和肿瘤结局。考虑到有限的样本量和事件计数,使用探索性简约多变量logistic回归模型评估三联曲,包括肿瘤大小组、肾脏复杂性、肺门解剖复杂性和年龄。结果:与T1a组相比,肿瘤bbb40cm患者的肾评分明显提高,高度复杂肿瘤的比例更高。手术时间较长(252.1 vs 226.3 min, P = 0.030),住院时间较长(中位6 vs 5 d, P = 0.040)。在热缺血时间、估计失血量、并发症发生率、手术切缘阳性率或三联术成就方面没有观察到统计学上的显著差异(43.8%对50.0%,P = 0.765),尽管该研究可能不足以发现有临床意义的差异。在3个月、6个月和12个月时,bbb40 cm组的绝对估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)较低,但eGFR保存百分比和慢性肾脏疾病(CKD)前期率没有显著差异。在探索性多变量分析中,肿瘤大小bbbb4 cm与三合一效果无独立相关性(优势比(OR) 0.80, 95%可信区间(CI) 0.28-2.26, P = 0.673),且未发现有统计学意义的独立预测因子。结论:bbb40cm肿瘤的RAPN与更高的解剖复杂性和适度增加的手术负担相关。在缺血性、并发症、肿瘤或相对肾功能结局方面没有观察到统计学上的显著差异,尽管这些比较应该谨慎解释,因为研究可能对罕见事件的研究不足。这些发现支持了RAPN在现实世界单中心环境下治疗较大恶性肾肿瘤的可行性。
期刊介绍:
World Journal of Oncology, bimonthly, publishes original contributions describing basic research and clinical investigation of cancer, on the cellular, molecular, prevention, diagnosis, therapy and prognosis aspects. The submissions can be basic research or clinical investigation oriented. This journal welcomes those submissions focused on the clinical trials of new treatment modalities for cancer, and those submissions focused on molecular or cellular research of the oncology pathogenesis. Case reports submitted for consideration of publication should explore either a novel genomic event/description or a new safety signal from an oncolytic agent. The areas of interested manuscripts are these disciplines: tumor immunology and immunotherapy; cancer molecular pharmacology and chemotherapy; drug sensitivity and resistance; cancer epidemiology; clinical trials; cancer pathology; radiobiology and radiation oncology; solid tumor oncology; hematological malignancies; surgical oncology; pediatric oncology; molecular oncology and cancer genes; gene therapy; cancer endocrinology; cancer metastasis; prevention and diagnosis of cancer; other cancer related subjects. The types of manuscripts accepted are original article, review, editorial, short communication, case report, letter to the editor, book review.