![]() |
JOURNAL TOOLS |
Publishing options |
eTOC |
To subscribe |
Submit an article |
Recommend to your librarian |
ARTICLE TOOLS |
Publication history |
Reprints |
Permissions |
Cite this article as |
Share |


YOUR ACCOUNT
YOUR ORDERS
SHOPPING BASKET
Items: 0
Total amount: € 0,00
HOW TO ORDER
YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS
YOUR ARTICLES
YOUR EBOOKS
COUPON
ACCESSIBILITY
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Free access
Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2021 December;73(6):773-80
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.20.04054-0
Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
language: English
Single overnight stay after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a bi-center experience
Umberto CARBONARA 1, 2, Jennifer LEE 3, Fabio CROCEROSSA 1, 4, Alessandro VECCIA 1, Lance J. HAMPTON 1, Daniel EUN 3, Riccardo AUTORINO 1 ✉
1 Division of Urology, VCU Health, Richmond, VA, USA; 2 Department of Urology, University of Bari, Bari, Italy; 3 Department of Urology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 4 Department of Urology, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy
BACKGROUND: Despite hospital length of stay (LOS) being shorter for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) compared to its open counterpart, several series in the literature report on average a LOS of 2-3 days or more. We aimed to assess factors predicting a prolonged length of stay (beyond a single overnight stay) in patients undergoing RAPN.
METHODS: Patients who underwent RAPN between 2010 and 2019 at two USA Centers were included and divided into two groups according to LOS: the study group included all patients who were discharged on POD1, whereas the control group included patients with LOS ≥2 days. Demographics, surgical and perioperative outcomes were compared between the groups. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of LOS ≥2.
RESULTS: Overall, 173 (60.5%) patients discharged on POD1, and 113 (39.5%) discharged on POD≥2. Patients in the study group presented a lower mean BMI (29 vs. 32, P=0.02). Retroperitoneal approach was performed in 13.3% patients with shorter LOS (P<0.001). There was a statistically significant difference in median OT (144 vs. 168 min, P=0.005) and WIT (19 vs. 23 min, P=0.001). We observed six postoperative complications (3.6%) in patients discharged on POD1 and 35 (30.5%) in control group (P<0.001). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) were observed in three of POD1 patients (1.8 vs. 6.1%, P<0.001). There was no difference in hospital readmission rate. On logistic regression analysis, independent predictors of prolonged LOS were OT (OR=1.01, 95% CI: 1.0-1.2, P=0.001), and occurrence of a postoperative complication (OR=2.2, 95% CI: 2.0-2.5, P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm that a single overnight stay after RAPN is feasible and safe. In our experience, and within the limitations of the present analysis, prolonged operative time and occurrence of immediate postoperative complications translate into higher risk of prolonged hospital stay. Besides adopting a minimally invasive approach, surgeons should also implement perioperative care pathways facilitating early discharge without increasing the risk of readmission.
KEY WORDS: Robotic surgical procedures; Nephrectomy; Length of stay