-
International Journal of Surgery... Sep 2022To compare the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) and laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To compare the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) and laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA).
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis of the primary outcomes of interest according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) Guidelines. Five databases, including Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. The search timeframe was set from the creation of the database to December 2021.
RESULTS
There were 26 studies including 2985 patients. Our study found that the robotic technique was superior to conventional laparoscopy for estimated blood loss (WMD = -18.25, 95% CI [-27.85, -8.65], P < 0.01), length of stay (WMD = -0.45, 95% CI [-0.57, -0.33], P < 0.01), and conversion to open (OR = 0.31, 95% CI [0.12, 0.78], P = 0.01), while complications and readmissions were comparable. Interestingly, there was no difference in operative time between the two surgical modalities, but subgroup analysis found that the retroperitoneal route robotic technique took longer (WMD = 14.64, 95% CI [0.04, 29.24], P < 0.05), whereas the study of the mixed surgical modality (RA versus LA with mixed transabdominal and retroperitoneal surgical routes) found that the robot required less time (WMD = -12.29, 95% CI [-22.86, -1.72], P < 0.05). For pheochromocytoma, RA was superior to LA in terms of length of stay (WMD = -0.49, 95% CI [-0.83, -0.15], P < 0.01), with no difference in other indicators.
CONCLUSION
robotic-assisted adrenalectomy is a superior technique to conventional laparoscopy in managing adrenal tumors, even in the case of a specific adrenal tumor - pheochromocytoma.
Topics: Adrenal Gland Neoplasms; Adrenalectomy; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Pheochromocytoma; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36075556
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106853 -
International Journal of Surgery... Sep 2023To compare the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RA-RPLND) versus non-robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RA-RPLND) versus non-robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in testicular cancer.
METHODS
The statistical analysis software used Stata 17. The weighted mean difference (WMD) represents the continuous variable, and the dichotomous variable chooses the odds ratio, and calculates the 95% CI. This systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA criteria, and AMSTAR guidelines (assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews). The Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched. The upper limit of the search time frame was February 2023, and no lower limit was set.
RESULTS
Seven studies involving 862 patients. Compared with open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, RA-RPLND appears to have a shorter length of stay [WMD=-1.21, 95% CI (-1.66, -0.76), P <0.05], less estimated blood loss [WMD=-0.69, 95% CI (-1.07, -0.32), P <0.05], and lower overall complications [odds ratio=0.45, 95% CI (0.28, 0.73), P <0.05]. RA-RPLND appears to have more lymph node yields than laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection [WMD=5.73, 95% CI (1.06, 10.40), P <0.05]. However, robotic versus open/laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection had similar results in operation time, lymph node positivity rate, recurrence during follow-up, and postoperative ejaculation disorders.
CONCLUSION
RA-RPLND appears to be safe and effective for testicular cancer, but longer follow-up and more studies are needed to confirm this.
Topics: Male; Humans; Testicular Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Retroperitoneal Space; Retrospective Studies; Lymph Node Excision; Treatment Outcome; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 37222676
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000520 -
Urologia Nov 2023Most genitourinary tract cancers have a negative impact on male fertility. Although testicular cancers have the worst impact, other tumors such as prostate, bladder, and... (Review)
Review
Most genitourinary tract cancers have a negative impact on male fertility. Although testicular cancers have the worst impact, other tumors such as prostate, bladder, and penis are diagnosed early and treated in relatively younger patients in which couple fertility can be an important concern. The purpose of this review is to highlight both the pathogenetic mechanisms of damage to male fertility in the context of the main urological cancers and the methods of preserving male fertility in an oncological setting, in light of the most recent scientific evidence. A systematic review of available literature was carried out on the main scientific search engines, such as PubMed, Clinicaltrials.Gov, and Google scholar. Three hundred twenty-five relevant articles on this subject were identified, 98 of which were selected being the most relevant to the purpose of this review. There is a strong evidence in literature that all of the genitourinary oncological therapies have a deep negative impact on male fertility: orchiectomy, partial orchiectomy, retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (RPLND), radical cystectomy, prostatectomy, penectomy, as well as radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and hormonal androgen suppression. Preservation of fertility is possible and includes cryopreservation, hormonal manipulation with GnRH analogs before chemotherapy, androgen replacement. Germ cell auto transplantation is an intriguing strategy with future perspectives. Careful evaluation of male fertility must be a key point before treating genitourinary tumors, taking into account patients' age and couples' perspectives. Informed consent should provide adequate information to the patient about the current state of his fertility and about the balance between risks and benefits in oncological terms. Standard approaches to genitourinary tumors should include a multidisciplinary team with urologists, oncologists, radiotherapists, psycho-sexologists, andrologists, gynecologists, and reproductive endocrinologists.
Topics: Humans; Male; Fertility Preservation; Androgens; Infertility, Male; Testicular Neoplasms; Urologic Neoplasms
PubMed: 37491831
DOI: 10.1177/03915603221146147 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology May 2023The debate on whether to choose a transperitoneal (TP) or retroperitoneal (RP) approach for treating upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) with laparoscopic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and pooled analysis of comparative outcomes.
BACKGROUND
The debate on whether to choose a transperitoneal (TP) or retroperitoneal (RP) approach for treating upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) with laparoscopic surgery has been drawing attention. This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the existing evidence regarding oncologic and perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (TLNU) and retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (RLNU) in managing UTUC.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar for identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated the outcomes of TLNU and RLNU for UTUC. Continuous variables were represented by weighted mean difference (WMD) and standard mean difference (SMD), while binary variables were represented by odds ratio (OR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the estimates.
RESULT
Six observational studies were incorporated into this meta-analysis. The overall TLNU was associated with significantly shorter operating time (WMD - 19.85; 95% CI - 38.03 to - 1.68; P = 0.03); longer recovery time of intestinal function (SMD 0.46; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.84; P = 0.02). However, the terms of estimated blood loss (WMD - 5.72; 95% CI - 19.6 to - 8.15; P = 0.42); length of stay (WMD - 0.35; 95% CI - 1.61 to 0.91; P = 0.59), visual analog pain scale (WMD - 0.38; 95% CI - 0.99 to 0.84; P = 0.22); drainage duration (WMD - 0.22; 95% CI - 0.61 to 0.17; P = 0.26); overall complication rates (OR 1.24; 95% CI 0.58 to 2.63; P = 0.58); local recurrence rate (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.3 to 1.21; P = 0.16); distant metastasis (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.04 to 20.77; P = 0.97); 1-year overall survival (OS) (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.1 to 2.01; P = 0.3) showed no difference between TLNU and RLUN.
CONCLUSION
TLNU provides similar surgical outcomes and oncologic results compared to RLUN; however, TLNU has a shorter procedure time and prolonged intestinal function recovery time. Due to the heterogeneity among the studies, randomized clinical trials with follow-ups in the long term are required to obtain more definite results.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier CRD42023388554.
Topics: Humans; Nephroureterectomy; Kidney Neoplasms; Ureteral Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Carcinoma, Transitional Cell; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Urinary Tract; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37248555
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03046-1 -
Robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection: a systematic review of perioperative outcomes.BJU International Jul 2023To assess the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) and to compare the perioperative outcomes of R-RPLND with open... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) and to compare the perioperative outcomes of R-RPLND with open RPLND (O-RPLND), as RPLND forms an integral part of the management of testis cancer and R-RPLND is a minimally invasive treatment option for this disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The PubMed , Scopus , Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science™ databases were searched for studies reporting perioperative outcomes of primary and post-chemotherapy R-RPLND and studies comparing R-RPLND with O-RPLND.
RESULTS
The search yielded 42 articles describing R-RPLND, including five comparative studies. The systematic review included 4222 patients (single-arm studies, n = 459; comparative studies, n = 3763). Of 459 patients in the single-arm studies, 271 underwent primary R-RPLND and 188 underwent post-chemotherapy R-RPLND. For primary R-RPLND, the operative time ranged from 175 to 540 min and the major complication rate was 4.1%. For post-chemotherapy R-RPLND, the operative time ranged from 134 to 550 min and the major complication rate was 8.5%. The conversion rate to open surgery was 2.2% in primary R-RPLND and 9.0% in post-chemotherapy R-RPLND. In comparison with O-RPLND, R-RPLND was associated with a lower transfusion rate (14.5% vs 0.9%, P < 0.001) and a lower complication rate (18.5% vs 7.8%, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION
Robot-assisted RPLND has acceptable perioperative outcomes in both the primary and post-chemotherapy settings but a notable rate of conversion to open surgery in the post-chemotherapy setting. Compared with O-RPLND, R-RPLND is associated with a lower transfusion rate and fewer overall complications. Given the potential impact of selection bias, the optimal patient selection criteria for R-RPLND remain to be elucidated.
Topics: Male; Humans; Robotics; Retroperitoneal Space; Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal; Lymph Node Excision; Testicular Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36754376
DOI: 10.1111/bju.15986 -
Urologic Oncology Apr 2024To evaluate the oncological outcomes and safety of primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) in patients with clinical stage (CS) II seminomatous testicular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To evaluate the oncological outcomes and safety of primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) in patients with clinical stage (CS) II seminomatous testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT). A literature search using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library was conducted on July 2023 to identify relevant studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The pooled recurrence rate and treatment-related complications were calculated using a random effects model. Overall 8 studies published between 1997 and 2023 including a total of 355 patients were selected for systematic review and meta-analysis with the overall median follow-up of 38 months. The overall and infield recurrence rate were 0.14 (95% CI: 0.08-0.22) and 0.04 (95% CI: 0.00-0.11), respectively. The overall pooled rate of ≥ Clavien Dindo grade III complications was 0.04 (95% CI: 0.01-0.10); there was no significant heterogeneity (I^2 = 35.10%, P = 0.19). Antegrade ejaculation was preserved with the overall pooled rate of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.00); there was no significant heterogeneity on Chi-square and I2 tests (I^2 = 0.00%, P = 0.58). Primary RPLND is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with CS II seminomatous TGCT resulting highly promising cure rates combined with low treatment-associated adverse events, at medium-term follow-up. However, owing to the lack of comparative studies to the current standard of care and the limited follow-up, individual decision must be made with the informed patient in a shared decision process together with a multidisciplinary team.
Topics: Male; Humans; Seminoma; Retroperitoneal Space; Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal; Lymph Node Excision; Testicular Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies; Neoplasm Staging
PubMed: 38360519
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.01.014 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology Mar 2023Recently, there has been a significant amount of debate concerning the question of whether laparoscopic surgery should be performed transperitoneally or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for large-volume renal carcinoma (> 7 cm): a systematic review and pooled analysis of comparative outcomes.
BACKGROUND
Recently, there has been a significant amount of debate concerning the question of whether laparoscopic surgery should be performed transperitoneally or retroperitoneally for treating large renal tumors.
AIM
The purpose of this research is to conduct a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of the previous research on the safety and efficacy of transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (TLRN) and retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (RLRN) in the treatment of large-volume renal malignancies.
METHODS
An extensive search of the scientific literature was carried out utilizing PubMed, Scopus, Embase, SinoMed, and Google Scholar in order to locate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective studies that compared the effectiveness of RLRN versus TLRN in the treatment of for large renal malignancies. For the purpose of comparing the oncologic and perioperative outcomes of the two techniques, data were taken from the research studies that were included and pooled together.
RESULTS
A total of 14 studies (five RCTs and nine retrospective studies) were incorporated into this meta-analysis. The overall RLRN had an association with significantly shorter operating time (OT) (MD [mean difference]: - 26.57; 95% CI [confidence interval]: - 33.39 to - 19.75; p < 0.00001); less estimated blood loss (EBL) (MD: - 20.55; CI: - 32.86 to - 8.23; p = 0.001); faster postoperative intestinal exhaust (MD: - 0.65; CI: - 0.95 to - 0.36; p < 0.00001). The terms of length of stay (LOS) (p = 0.26), blood transfusion (p = 0.26), conversion rate (p = 0.26), intraoperative complications (p = 0.5), postoperative complications (p = 0.18), local recurrence rate (p = 0.56), positive surgical margin (PSM) (p = 0.45), and distant recurrence rate (p = 0.7) did not show any differences.
CONCLUSIONS
RLRN provides surgical and oncologic results similar to TLRN, with potential advantages regarding shorter OT, EBL, and postoperative intestinal exhaust. Due to the high heterogeneity among the studies, long-term randomized clinical trials are required to obtain more definitive results.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Treatment Outcome; Kidney Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Nephrectomy; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 36894912
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-02967-1 -
Radiation Oncology (London, England) Sep 2022Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) represent a diverse group of rare malignant tumors. Currently, five to six weeks of preoperative radiotherapy (RT) combined with surgery... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) represent a diverse group of rare malignant tumors. Currently, five to six weeks of preoperative radiotherapy (RT) combined with surgery constitute the mainstay of therapy for localized high-grade sarcomas (G2-G3). Growing evidence suggests that shortening preoperative RT courses by hypofractionation neither increases toxicity rates nor impairs oncological outcomes. Instead, shortening RT courses may improve therapy adherence, raise cost-effectiveness, and provide more treatment opportunities for a wider range of patients. Presumed higher rates of adverse effects and worse outcomes are concerns about hypofractionated RT (HFRT) for STS. This systematic review summarizes the current evidence on preoperative HFRT for the treatment of STS and discusses toxicity and oncological outcomes compared to normofractionated RT.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of clinical trials describing outcomes for preoperative HFRT in the management of STS using PubMed, the Cochrane library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, and Ovid Medline. We followed the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Trials on retroperitoneal sarcomas, postoperative RT, and hyperthermia were excluded. Articles published until November 30th, 2021, were included.
RESULTS
Initial search yielded 94 articles. After removal of duplicate and ineligible articles, 13 articles qualified for analysis. Eight phase II trials and five retrospective analyses were reviewed. Most trials applied 5 × 5 Gy preoperatively in patients with high-grade STS. HFRT courses did not show increased rates of adverse events compared to historical trials of normofractionated RT. Toxicity rates were mostly comparable or lower than in trials of normofractionated RT. Moreover, HFRT achieved comparable local control rates with shorter duration of therapy. Currently, more than 15 prospective studies on HFRT + / - chemotherapy are ongoing.
CONCLUSIONS
Retrospective data and phase II trials suggest preoperative HFRT to be a reasonable treatment modality for STS. Oncological outcomes and toxicity profiles were favorable. To date, our knowledge is mostly derived from phase II data. No randomized phase III trial comparing normofractionated and HFRT in STS has been published yet. Multiple ongoing phase II trials applying HFRT to investigate acute and late toxicity will hopefully bring forth valuable findings.
Topics: Humans; Prospective Studies; Radiation Dose Hypofractionation; Retrospective Studies; Sarcoma; Soft Tissue Neoplasms
PubMed: 36104789
DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02072-9 -
BMC Surgery Sep 2023Surgery is the mainstay of treatment and completeness of surgical resection is critical to achieve local control for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). En-bloc resection of...
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Surgery is the mainstay of treatment and completeness of surgical resection is critical to achieve local control for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). En-bloc resection of adjacent organs, including major abdominal vessels, is often required to achieve negative margins. The aim of this review was to summarise the available evidence to assess the relative benefits and disadvantages of an aggressive surgical approach with vascular resection in patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS).
METHODS
We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for relevant studies published from inception up to August 1, 2022. We performed a systematic review of the available studies to assess the safety and long-term survival results of vascular resection for RPS.
RESULTS
We identified a total of 23 studies for our review. Overall postoperative in-hospital or 30-day mortality rate of patients with primary iliocaval leiomyosarcoma was 3% (11/359), and the major complication rate was 13%. The recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates after the follow-up period varied between 15% and 52%, and the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates ranged from 25 to 78%. Overall postoperative in-hospital or 30-day mortality rate of patients with RPSs receiving vascular resection was 3%, and the major complication rate was 27%. The RFS rates after the follow-up period were 18-86%, and the 5-year OS rates varied between 50% and 73%. There were no significant differences in the rates of RFS (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.74-1.19; p = 0.945) and OS (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.66-1.36; p = 0.774) between the extended resection group and tumour resection alone group.
CONCLUSIONS
With adequate preparation and proper management, for patients with RPSs involving major vessels, aggressive surgical approach with vascular resection can achieve R0/R1 resection and improve survival.
Topics: Humans; Retroperitoneal Neoplasms; Sarcoma; Soft Tissue Neoplasms; Hospitals; Postoperative Period
PubMed: 37700246
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-02178-1 -
Operative Neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.) Feb 2022Retroperitoneal nerve sheath tumors present a surgical challenge. Despite potential advantages, robotic surgery for these tumors has been limited. Identifying and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Retroperitoneal nerve sheath tumors present a surgical challenge. Despite potential advantages, robotic surgery for these tumors has been limited. Identifying and sparing functional nerve fascicles during resection can be difficult, increasing the risk of neurological morbidity.
OBJECTIVE
To review the literature regarding robotic resection of retroperitoneal nerve sheath tumors and retrospectively analyze our experience with robotic resection of these tumors using a manual electromyographic probe to identify and preserve functional nerve fascicles.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed the clinical courses of 3 patients with retroperitoneal tumors treated at the National Institutes of Health by a multidisciplinary team using the da Vinci Xi system. Parent motor nerve fascicles were identified intraoperatively with a bipolar neurostimulation probe inserted through a manual port, permitting tumor resection with motor fascicle preservation.
RESULTS
Two patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 underwent surgery for retroperitoneal neurofibromas located within the iliopsoas muscle, and 1 patient underwent surgery for a pelvic sporadic schwannoma. All tumors were successfully resected, with no complications or postoperative neurological deficits. Preoperative symptoms were improved or resolved in all patients.
CONCLUSION
Resection of retroperitoneal nerve sheath tumors confers an excellent prognosis, although their deep location and proximity to vital structures present unique challenges. Robotic surgery with intraoperative neurostimulation mapping is safe and effective for marginal resection of histologically benign or atypical retroperitoneal nerve sheath tumors, providing excellent visibility, increased dexterity and precision, and reduced risk of neurological morbidity.
Topics: Humans; Nerve Sheath Neoplasms; Neurilemmoma; Neurosurgical Procedures; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; United States
PubMed: 35007270
DOI: 10.1227/ONS.0000000000000051