Comparative analysis of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy techniques in the treatment of localized renal tumors

Abstract

Objective: To report our initial experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy compared with traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

Methods: A retrospective review of the Johns Hopkins minimally invasive urologic surgery database identified 207 consecutive patients who had undergone laparoscopic or robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy from 2007 to 2011 by a single surgeon. The patient demographics and pathologic, operative, and perioperative outcomes were compared between the surgical techniques. The early oncologic outcomes are reported for the entire cohort.

Results: A total of 102 and 105 patients underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, respectively. The demographic data were comparable between the 2 groups. The clinical and pathologic tumor characteristics were similar between the 2 groups, and a significant proportion (≥48%) of patients in each group had moderate to high complexity tumors. Patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy had decreased warm ischemia times, estimated blood loss, and operative times on univariate and multivariate analysis. No difference was seen in the total perioperative or significant urologic complications between the 2 groups. A review of the early oncologic outcomes revealed no local recurrences and 1 case of metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Conclusion: Minimally invasive partial nephrectomy is associated with favorable perioperative outcomes and low morbidity. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy appears to be associated with favorable warm ischemia times compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.