Comparison of the Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Approach in Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy in an Initial Case Series in Japan
- 1 November 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Mary Ann Liebert Inc in Journal of Endourology
- Vol. 27 (11), 1384-1388
- https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2012.0641
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the results from the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches in our initial case series of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in terms of surgical time, renal artery clamping time, postoperative renal function, adverse events, and surgical margin status. Patients and Methods: The initial 26 consecutive RAPNs performed for solid renal tumors in our hospital were categorized by the approach used, transperitoneal or retroperitoneal, and compared for body mass index, tumor size, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score, PADUA score, tumor location, surgical time, renal artery clamping time, renal function change after surgery, operative blood loss, surgical margin status, and adverse events (AEs). Results: The median tumor size was 25 mm (range 15–50). A transperitoneal approach was used in 16 patients and a retroperitoneal approach was used in 10 patients. There was no significant difference in renal tumor and patient characteristics between the two groups except tumor location (anterior tumor was significantly more in the transperitoneal approach and posterior tumor was significantly more in retroperitoneal approach (P=0.0144 and P=0.0100, respectively)). Operative time (239±63.0 minutes in the transperitoneal group vs. 193±40.6 minutes in the retroperitoneal group), warm ischemic time (24.3±9.07 minutes in the transperitoneal group vs. 24.7±8.35 minutes in the retroperitoneal group) and AEs (1/16 in the transperitoneal group vs. 1/10 in the retroperitoneal group; both cases were Clavien-Dindo grade I) did not show any significant difference between the two approaches (P=0.0792, 0.5485, and 0.7270, respectively). Conclusions: The retroperitoneal approach in RAPN appears to be a safe and technically feasible minimally invasive option for nephron-sparing surgery, based on our initial case series, and showed equivalent outcomes to those of the transperitoneal approach even though it was an initial robotic renal surgery series. Future studies, including a larger number of cases, are planned to draw more definitive conclusions.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Robotic Retroperitoneal Partial Nephrectomy: A Four-Arm ApproachJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 2012
- Minimally invasive partial or total nephrectomy in children: a comparison between transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approachesPediatric Surgery International, 2011
- Impact of the Learning Curve on Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Parenchymal Renal TumoursEuropean Urology, 2010
- Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA) Classification of Renal Tumours in Patients who are Candidates for Nephron-Sparing SurgeryEuropean Urology, 2009
- The R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry Score: A Comprehensive Standardized System for Quantitating Renal Tumor Size, Location and DepthJournal of Urology, 2009
- Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Current review of the technique and literatureJournal of Minimal Access Surgery, 2009
- Long-Term Outcomes After Nephron Sparing Surgery for Renal Cell Carcinoma Larger Than 4 cmJournal of Urology, 2008
- Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Technique and initial clinical experience with da Vinci robotic systemUrology, 2004
- Classification of Surgical ComplicationsAnnals of Surgery, 2004
- NEPHRON SPARING SURGERY FOR RENAL TUMORS: INDICATIONS, TECHNIQUES AND OUTCOMESJournal of Urology, 2001