机器人辅助肾部分切除术与传统腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗完全内生性肾肿瘤的疗效比较:一项多中心前瞻性研究。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Nobuyuki Hinata, Sae Murakami, Yuzo Nakano, Isao Hara, Tsunenori Kondo, Shuzo Hamamoto, Ryoichi Shiroki, Jun Nagayama, Mutsushi Kawakita, Masatoshi Eto, Osamu Ukimura, Atsushi Takenaka, Toshio Takagi, Masaki Shimbo, Haruhito Azuma, Tetsuya Yoshida, Junya Furukawa, Naoki Kawamorita, Masato Fujisawa
{"title":"机器人辅助肾部分切除术与传统腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗完全内生性肾肿瘤的疗效比较:一项多中心前瞻性研究。","authors":"Nobuyuki Hinata, Sae Murakami, Yuzo Nakano, Isao Hara, Tsunenori Kondo, Shuzo Hamamoto, Ryoichi Shiroki, Jun Nagayama, Mutsushi Kawakita, Masatoshi Eto, Osamu Ukimura, Atsushi Takenaka, Toshio Takagi, Masaki Shimbo, Haruhito Azuma, Tetsuya Yoshida, Junya Furukawa, Naoki Kawamorita, Masato Fujisawa","doi":"10.1007/s10147-024-02599-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors with the reported outcomes of conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and investigate the transition of renal function after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label trial across 17 academic centers in Japan. Patients with endophytic renal tumors classified as cT1, cN0, cM0 were included and underwent robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. We defined two primary outcomes to assess functional and oncological aspects of the procedure, which were represented by the warm ischemic time and positive surgical margin, respectively. Comparisons were made using control values previously reported in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy studies. In the historical control group, the warm ischemia time was 25.2, and the positive surgical margin was 13%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our per-protocol analysis included 98 participants. The mean warm ischemic time was 20.3 min (99% confidence interval 18.3-22.3; p < 0.0001 vs. 25.2). None of the 98 participants had a positive surgical margin (99% confidence interval 0-5.3%; p < 0.0001 vs. 13.0%). The renal function ratio of eGFR before and after protocol treatment multiplied by splits was 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.75). Factors such as preoperative eGFR, resected weight, and warm ischemic time influenced the functional loss of the partially nephrectomized kidney after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors offers a shorter warm ischemia time and comparable positive surgical margin rate compared with conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":13869,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"1548-1556"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11420261/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy compared to conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumor: a multicenter, prospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Nobuyuki Hinata, Sae Murakami, Yuzo Nakano, Isao Hara, Tsunenori Kondo, Shuzo Hamamoto, Ryoichi Shiroki, Jun Nagayama, Mutsushi Kawakita, Masatoshi Eto, Osamu Ukimura, Atsushi Takenaka, Toshio Takagi, Masaki Shimbo, Haruhito Azuma, Tetsuya Yoshida, Junya Furukawa, Naoki Kawamorita, Masato Fujisawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10147-024-02599-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors with the reported outcomes of conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and investigate the transition of renal function after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label trial across 17 academic centers in Japan. Patients with endophytic renal tumors classified as cT1, cN0, cM0 were included and underwent robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. We defined two primary outcomes to assess functional and oncological aspects of the procedure, which were represented by the warm ischemic time and positive surgical margin, respectively. Comparisons were made using control values previously reported in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy studies. In the historical control group, the warm ischemia time was 25.2, and the positive surgical margin was 13%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our per-protocol analysis included 98 participants. The mean warm ischemic time was 20.3 min (99% confidence interval 18.3-22.3; p < 0.0001 vs. 25.2). None of the 98 participants had a positive surgical margin (99% confidence interval 0-5.3%; p < 0.0001 vs. 13.0%). The renal function ratio of eGFR before and after protocol treatment multiplied by splits was 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.75). Factors such as preoperative eGFR, resected weight, and warm ischemic time influenced the functional loss of the partially nephrectomized kidney after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors offers a shorter warm ischemia time and comparable positive surgical margin rate compared with conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1548-1556\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11420261/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-024-02599-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-024-02599-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究背景本研究旨在比较机器人辅助肾部分切除术治疗完全内生性肾肿瘤的疗效与传统腹腔镜肾部分切除术的报道结果,并调查机器人辅助肾部分切除术后肾功能的转变情况:我们在日本的 17 个学术中心开展了一项前瞻性、多中心、单臂、开放标签试验。纳入的内生性肾肿瘤患者被分类为 cT1、cN0、cM0,并接受了机器人辅助肾部分切除术。我们定义了两个主要结果来评估手术的功能性和肿瘤学方面,分别以温热缺血时间和手术切缘阳性来表示。我们使用之前在腹腔镜肾部分切除术研究中报告的对照值进行了比较。在历史对照组中,热缺血时间为25.2分钟,手术切缘阳性率为13%:我们的按协议分析包括 98 名参与者。平均热缺血时间为 20.3 分钟(99% 置信区间为 18.3-22.3;P 结论:机器人辅助部分肾脏切除术的平均热缺血时间为 25.2 分钟,手术切缘阳性率为 13%:与传统腹腔镜肾部分切除术相比,机器人辅助肾部分切除术治疗完全内生性肾肿瘤的热缺血时间更短,手术切缘阳性率相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy compared to conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumor: a multicenter, prospective study.

Efficacy of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy compared to conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumor: a multicenter, prospective study.

Background: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors with the reported outcomes of conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and investigate the transition of renal function after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.

Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label trial across 17 academic centers in Japan. Patients with endophytic renal tumors classified as cT1, cN0, cM0 were included and underwent robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. We defined two primary outcomes to assess functional and oncological aspects of the procedure, which were represented by the warm ischemic time and positive surgical margin, respectively. Comparisons were made using control values previously reported in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy studies. In the historical control group, the warm ischemia time was 25.2, and the positive surgical margin was 13%.

Results: Our per-protocol analysis included 98 participants. The mean warm ischemic time was 20.3 min (99% confidence interval 18.3-22.3; p < 0.0001 vs. 25.2). None of the 98 participants had a positive surgical margin (99% confidence interval 0-5.3%; p < 0.0001 vs. 13.0%). The renal function ratio of eGFR before and after protocol treatment multiplied by splits was 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.75). Factors such as preoperative eGFR, resected weight, and warm ischemic time influenced the functional loss of the partially nephrectomized kidney after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.

Conclusions: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors offers a shorter warm ischemia time and comparable positive surgical margin rate compared with conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Oncology (IJCO) welcomes original research papers on all aspects of clinical oncology that report the results of novel and timely investigations. Reports on clinical trials are encouraged. Experimental studies will also be accepted if they have obvious relevance to clinical oncology. Membership in the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology is not a prerequisite for submission to the journal. Papers are received on the understanding that: their contents have not been published in whole or in part elsewhere; that they are subject to peer review by at least two referees and the Editors, and to editorial revision of the language and contents; and that the Editors are responsible for their acceptance, rejection, and order of publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信