Home > Riviste > Minerva Urology and Nephrology > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2022 April;74(2) > Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2022 April;74(2):203-8



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo



Minerva Urology and Nephrology 2022 April;74(2):203-8

DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.22.04671-7


lingua: Inglese

Robotic partial nephrectomy for management of renal mass in patients with a solitary kidney: can we expand the indication to T2 and T3 disease?

Alp T. BEKSAC 1, Kennedy E. OKHAWERE 2, Mahmoud ABOU ZEINAB 1, Bobby HARRISON 3, Michael D. STIFELMAN 3,
Daniel D. EUN 4, Ronney ABAZA 5, Ketan K. BADANI 2, Jihad H. KAOUK 1

1 Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; 2 Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Urology, Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; 3 Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Hackensack, NJ, USA; 4 School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 5 Central Ohio Urology Group, Columbus, OH, USA

BACKGROUND: Management of complex renal masses is challenging in a solitary kidney setting. We retrospectively compared oncological and renal functional outcomes between robotic and open partial nephrectomy (PN) in patients with a pT2-pT3 renal mass and a solitary kidney.
METHODS: From a multi-institutional series, we identified 20 robotic partial nephrectomies (RPN) and 15 open partial nephrectomies (OPN) patients confirmed to have a pT2 or pT3 renal cancer. Surgeries were performed between January 2012 and July 2019. Patients with familial renal cell carcinoma, prior ipsilateral PN, or multiple ipsilateral synchronous tumors were excluded from the analysis. Baseline characteristics, perioperative and postoperative outcomes were compared using χ2 test, Fisher’s Exact Test, Mann-Whitney U Test, and Student’s t-test.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable. Cold ischemia was utilized more in the open group (92.9% vs. 15.8%, P<0.001). OPN group had a longer ischemia time (48.9 min vs. 27.3 min, P<0.001), a higher major complication rate (38.5% vs. 11.1%, P=0.009), and a higher length of stay was (5 vs. 3.5 days, P=0.023). Positive surgical margin rate was comparable (20% OPN vs. 15% RPN; P=1.000). At a mean follow up of 21 months local recurrence rates (1 OPN vs. 2 RPN, P=1.000) were comparable, chronic kidney disease upstaging rate (46.7% OPN vs. 45.0% RPN, P=0.922) and estimated glomerular filtration rate preservation at one year (75.2%% in OPN vs. 79.1% RPN, P=0.707) were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS: In select cases and experienced hands, the robotic approach offers a reasonable alternative to open surgery in patients with pT2 and pT3 tumors and a solitary kidney.

KEY WORDS: Kidney; Nephrectomy; Carcinoma, renal cell; Solitary kidney

inizio pagina