Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Open Access
- 20 April 2016
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in International Journal of Surgery
- Vol. 30, 109-115
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.04.023
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the perioperative outcomes of the transperitoneal (TP) and retroperitoneal (RP) approaches in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify relevant studies up to March 2016. All studies with enough data comparing TP-RAPN with RP-RAPN were included. Outcomes of interest were complication, conversion, operative time (OT), warm ischemia time (WIT), estimated blood loss (EBL), and positive surgical margin (PSM). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effect model. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Results: Four studies with the total number of 449 patients assessing TP-RAPN (n = 229) versus RP-RAPN (n = 220) were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups in any of demographic variables. There were also no significant differences between TP-RAPN and RP-RAPN groups regarding tumor size, tumor laterality, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score, and tumor pathology. There was marginally significant difference between the two groups regarding OT (p = 0.05, WMD: 28.03; 95% CI, 0.41-55.65). No significant differences were found regarding complication, conversion, WIT, EBL, and PSM. No obvious publication bias was observed. Conclusions: The present meta-analysis suggests that RP-RAPN appears to be equally safe and efficacious in terms of complication, conversion, WIT, EBL and PSM compared with TP-RAPN. In addition, RP-RAPN has marginally significant advantage of shorter OT. Randomized controlled trials and high-quality observational cohort studies with large sample size and long-term follow-up are needed to update our findings. (c) 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of IJS Publishing Group Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Use, Costs and Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic Assisted, Laparoscopic and Open Urological SurgeryJournal of Urology, 2012
- Robotic partial nephrectomy in the setting of prior abdominal surgeryBJU International, 2010
- 7-Year Oncological Outcomes After Laparoscopic and Open Partial NephrectomyJournal of Urology, 2010
- The R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry Score: A Comprehensive Standardized System for Quantitating Renal Tumor Size, Location and DepthJournal of Urology, 2009
- Laparoscopic and Open Partial Nephrectomy: A Matched-Pair Comparison of 200 PatientsEuropean Urology, 2009
- Comparison of Intraoperative Parameters and Perioperative Complications of Retroperitoneal and Transperitoneal Approaches to Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Support for a Retroperitoneal Approach in Selected PatientsJournal of Endourology, 2007
- Comparison of 1,800 Laparoscopic and Open Partial Nephrectomies for Single Renal TumorsJournal of Urology, 2007
- TRANSPERITONEAL VERSUS RETROPERITONEAL LAPAROSCOPIC PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY: PATIENT SELECTION AND PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMESJournal of Urology, 2005
- LAPAROSCOPIC PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY: COMPARISON OF TRANSPERITONEAL AND RETROPERITONEAL APPROACHESJournal of Urology, 2005
- Classification of Surgical ComplicationsAnnals of Surgery, 2004