钳上与钳下机器人辅助肾部分切除术实现改良三连胜:来自一家大容量三级机器人中心的逆治疗概率加权分析。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Mario Belmonte, Nicola Frego, Marco Ticonosco, Alessandro Pissavini, Eleonora Balestrazzi, Gabriele Sorce, Francesco Barletta, Silvia Rebuffo, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Simone Morra, Edward Lambert, Ruben De Groote, Geert De Naeyer, Alexandre Mottrie
{"title":"钳上与钳下机器人辅助肾部分切除术实现改良三连胜:来自一家大容量三级机器人中心的逆治疗概率加权分析。","authors":"Mario Belmonte, Nicola Frego, Marco Ticonosco, Alessandro Pissavini, Eleonora Balestrazzi, Gabriele Sorce, Francesco Barletta, Silvia Rebuffo, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Simone Morra, Edward Lambert, Ruben De Groote, Geert De Naeyer, Alexandre Mottrie","doi":"10.1007/s11701-024-02078-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>On-clamp partial nephrectomy for the surgical treatment of renal masses poses the risk of ischemia and greater post-operative renal function loss. Conversely, the off-clamp technique might enhance renal function preservation by avoiding any ischemia time. Nevertheless, the debate persists regarding the efficacy of the on- versus off-clamp partial nephrectomy in achieving better surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes. We retrospectively assessed the data from patients undergoing Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RAPN) from 2016 and 2023 in a tertiary robotic center. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to account for selection bias in treatment allocation. The main objective of the study was assessing the achievement rates of a modified trifecta within the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis (MLRA) was employed to assess the predictors of trifecta achievement. 532 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 74.1% vs. 25.9% underwent on- and off-clamp, respectively. Balancing the two groups for the main predictors of on-clamp surgery, there were no significant differences between on- and off-clamp in terms of estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, intra- and post-operative complications, positive surgical margins, and post-operative mean reduction of eGFR. Finally, no differences were found in the rate of \"trifecta\" achievement between on-clamp and off-clamp RAPN (24.6% vs. 21%, p = 0.82). At MLRA, off-clamp technique was not a predictor of trifecta achievement compared to the on-clamp technique (off-clamp vs. on-clamp, aOR 1.24, 95% CIs [0.65-2.36], p = 0.58). Our study revealed that clamping technique does not imply clinically relevant differences in reaching trifecta outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":"327"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On-clamp vs off-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for achieving modified trifecta: inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis from a high-volume tertiary robotic center.\",\"authors\":\"Mario Belmonte, Nicola Frego, Marco Ticonosco, Alessandro Pissavini, Eleonora Balestrazzi, Gabriele Sorce, Francesco Barletta, Silvia Rebuffo, Claudia Collà Ruvolo, Simone Morra, Edward Lambert, Ruben De Groote, Geert De Naeyer, Alexandre Mottrie\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11701-024-02078-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>On-clamp partial nephrectomy for the surgical treatment of renal masses poses the risk of ischemia and greater post-operative renal function loss. Conversely, the off-clamp technique might enhance renal function preservation by avoiding any ischemia time. Nevertheless, the debate persists regarding the efficacy of the on- versus off-clamp partial nephrectomy in achieving better surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes. We retrospectively assessed the data from patients undergoing Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RAPN) from 2016 and 2023 in a tertiary robotic center. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to account for selection bias in treatment allocation. The main objective of the study was assessing the achievement rates of a modified trifecta within the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis (MLRA) was employed to assess the predictors of trifecta achievement. 532 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 74.1% vs. 25.9% underwent on- and off-clamp, respectively. Balancing the two groups for the main predictors of on-clamp surgery, there were no significant differences between on- and off-clamp in terms of estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, intra- and post-operative complications, positive surgical margins, and post-operative mean reduction of eGFR. Finally, no differences were found in the rate of \\\"trifecta\\\" achievement between on-clamp and off-clamp RAPN (24.6% vs. 21%, p = 0.82). At MLRA, off-clamp technique was not a predictor of trifecta achievement compared to the on-clamp technique (off-clamp vs. on-clamp, aOR 1.24, 95% CIs [0.65-2.36], p = 0.58). Our study revealed that clamping technique does not imply clinically relevant differences in reaching trifecta outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"327\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02078-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02078-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在夹钳上进行肾部分切除手术治疗肾脏肿块有缺血和术后肾功能丧失的风险。相反,离体钳技术可避免任何缺血时间,从而加强肾功能保护。尽管如此,关于钳上与钳下肾部分切除术是否能取得更好的手术、功能和肿瘤效果的争论依然存在。我们回顾性评估了2016年至2023年在一家三级机器人中心接受机器人辅助肾部分切除术(RAPN)的患者数据。研究采用了逆概率治疗加权法(IPTW)来考虑治疗分配中的选择偏倚。研究的主要目的是评估两组中改良三联疗法的达标率。研究采用了多变量逻辑回归分析(MLRA)来评估三连胜的预测因素。分析共纳入了 532 名患者,其中 74.1% 和 25.9% 的患者分别接受了钳夹和非钳夹。在平衡两组钳夹手术的主要预测因素后发现,钳夹手术和非钳夹手术在估计失血量、输血率、术中和术后并发症、手术切缘阳性以及术后 eGFR 平均降低率方面没有显著差异。最后,钳上和钳下 RAPN 的 "三连胜 "成功率没有差异(24.6% 对 21%,P = 0.82)。在 MLRA 中,关闭夹钳技术与开启夹钳技术相比并不能预测三连胜的实现率(关闭夹钳 vs. 开启夹钳,aOR 1.24,95% CI [0.65-2.36],p = 0.58)。我们的研究表明,钳夹技术并不意味着在达到三连胜结果方面存在临床相关性差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On-clamp vs off-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for achieving modified trifecta: inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis from a high-volume tertiary robotic center.

On-clamp partial nephrectomy for the surgical treatment of renal masses poses the risk of ischemia and greater post-operative renal function loss. Conversely, the off-clamp technique might enhance renal function preservation by avoiding any ischemia time. Nevertheless, the debate persists regarding the efficacy of the on- versus off-clamp partial nephrectomy in achieving better surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes. We retrospectively assessed the data from patients undergoing Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RAPN) from 2016 and 2023 in a tertiary robotic center. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to account for selection bias in treatment allocation. The main objective of the study was assessing the achievement rates of a modified trifecta within the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis (MLRA) was employed to assess the predictors of trifecta achievement. 532 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 74.1% vs. 25.9% underwent on- and off-clamp, respectively. Balancing the two groups for the main predictors of on-clamp surgery, there were no significant differences between on- and off-clamp in terms of estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, intra- and post-operative complications, positive surgical margins, and post-operative mean reduction of eGFR. Finally, no differences were found in the rate of "trifecta" achievement between on-clamp and off-clamp RAPN (24.6% vs. 21%, p = 0.82). At MLRA, off-clamp technique was not a predictor of trifecta achievement compared to the on-clamp technique (off-clamp vs. on-clamp, aOR 1.24, 95% CIs [0.65-2.36], p = 0.58). Our study revealed that clamping technique does not imply clinically relevant differences in reaching trifecta outcomes.

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
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.
×
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