Robot-assisted versus open surgery for radical nephrectomy with level 1-2 vena cava tumor thrombectomy : a French monocenter experience (UroCCR study #73).
N. Vuong, J. Ferrière, C. Michiels, L. Calen, L. Tesi, G. Capon, H. Bensadoun, E. Alezra, V. Estrade, G. Robert, F. Bladou, J. Bernhard
{"title":"Robot-assisted versus open surgery for radical nephrectomy with level 1-2 vena cava tumor thrombectomy : a French monocenter experience (UroCCR study #73).","authors":"N. Vuong, J. Ferrière, C. Michiels, L. Calen, L. Tesi, G. Capon, H. Bensadoun, E. Alezra, V. Estrade, G. Robert, F. Bladou, J. Bernhard","doi":"10.23736/S0393-2249.20.04052-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nTo assess the feasibility of Robot-assisted Radical nephrectomy with Inferior Vena Cava Thrombectomy (RRVCT) and compare peri operative and oncological outcomes of this approach to open surgery for renal tumors with Level 1-2 Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Thrombus.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe performed a retrospective analysis of patients surgically treated for renal cancer with IVC level 1-2 thrombus in the Urology department of Bordeaux University Hospital between December 2015 and December 2019. Patients were stratified by surgical approach in two groups : open vs robotic procedures. Pre, per and post-operative data were collected within the framework of the UroCCR project (NCT03293563). Univariate and multivariate analysis using regression models were performed.\n\n\nRESULTS\nA total of 40 patients underwent Radical Nephrectomy (RN) with IVC tumor thrombus. Open and robotic surgery represented respectively 30 and 10 cases. The two groups were comparable regarding pre-operative tumor and patient characteristics. Robotic procedures were associated with lower Estimated Blood Loss (EBL) (500 vs. 1250mL, p = 0.02), shorter Intensive Care Unit stay (2 vs. 4 days, p = 0.03) and decrease of global Length Of Stay (LOS) (7 vs. 10 days, p < 0.01). Operative Time (OT) was significantly longer in the robotic group (350.5 vs. 208 min, p < 0.01). No difference were observed between the two approaches regarding complications and oncological outcomes.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nRobotic approach induced lower bleeding and shorter LOS but required longer OT. This technique is feasible and safe for selected cases and experimented surgical team. Complications rate and oncological outcomes are not different compared to standard open procedures.","PeriodicalId":49015,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.04052-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
BACKGROUND
To assess the feasibility of Robot-assisted Radical nephrectomy with Inferior Vena Cava Thrombectomy (RRVCT) and compare peri operative and oncological outcomes of this approach to open surgery for renal tumors with Level 1-2 Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Thrombus.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective analysis of patients surgically treated for renal cancer with IVC level 1-2 thrombus in the Urology department of Bordeaux University Hospital between December 2015 and December 2019. Patients were stratified by surgical approach in two groups : open vs robotic procedures. Pre, per and post-operative data were collected within the framework of the UroCCR project (NCT03293563). Univariate and multivariate analysis using regression models were performed.
RESULTS
A total of 40 patients underwent Radical Nephrectomy (RN) with IVC tumor thrombus. Open and robotic surgery represented respectively 30 and 10 cases. The two groups were comparable regarding pre-operative tumor and patient characteristics. Robotic procedures were associated with lower Estimated Blood Loss (EBL) (500 vs. 1250mL, p = 0.02), shorter Intensive Care Unit stay (2 vs. 4 days, p = 0.03) and decrease of global Length Of Stay (LOS) (7 vs. 10 days, p < 0.01). Operative Time (OT) was significantly longer in the robotic group (350.5 vs. 208 min, p < 0.01). No difference were observed between the two approaches regarding complications and oncological outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Robotic approach induced lower bleeding and shorter LOS but required longer OT. This technique is feasible and safe for selected cases and experimented surgical team. Complications rate and oncological outcomes are not different compared to standard open procedures.
目的:评估机器人辅助根治性肾切除术联合下腔静脉血栓切除术(RRVCT)的可行性,并比较该方法与伴有1-2级下腔静脉血栓的肾肿瘤开放手术的围手术期和肿瘤预后。方法回顾性分析2015年12月至2019年12月在波尔多大学医院泌尿外科手术治疗的伴有IVC 1-2级血栓的肾癌患者。患者按手术入路分为两组:开放手术和机器人手术。术前、术中和术后数据在UroCCR项目(NCT03293563)框架内收集。采用回归模型进行单因素和多因素分析。结果40例伴有下腔静脉肿瘤血栓的患者行根治性肾切除术。开放手术30例,机器人手术10例。两组在术前肿瘤和患者特征方面具有可比性。机器人手术与较低的估计失血量(EBL)(500对1250mL, p = 0.02)、较短的重症监护病房住院时间(2天对4天,p = 0.03)和减少的总住院时间(LOS)(7天对10天,p < 0.01)相关。机器人组手术时间(OT)明显长于机器人组(350.5 min vs. 208 min, p < 0.01)。两种方法在并发症和肿瘤预后方面没有观察到差异。结论机器人入路出血少,术后LOS短,但手术时间较长。该技术在特定病例和实验外科团队中是可行和安全的。与标准开放手术相比,并发症发生率和肿瘤预后没有差异。
期刊介绍:
The journal Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica publishes scientific papers on nephrology and urology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of Minerva opinion editorials, editorial comments, original articles, video illustrated articles, review articles and letters to the Editor.