-
Journal of Robotic Surgery Oct 2023Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is increasingly being used for the complex surgical management of renal masses. The comparison of RAPN with open partial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is increasingly being used for the complex surgical management of renal masses. The comparison of RAPN with open partial nephrectomy (OPN) has not yet led to a unified conclusion with regard to perioperative outcomes. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on the perioperative outcomes of RAPN compared with OPN. We performed a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library database for randomized control trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs that compare OPN to RAPN. The primary outcomes included perioperative, functional and oncologic. The odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were applied for the comparison of dichotomous and continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies, comprising 936 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Our findings indicated that there were no significant differences in blood loss, minor complication rate, eGFR decline from baseline, positive surgical margin, and ischemia time between OPN and RAPN. However, RAPN was associated with a shorter hospital stay (WMD 1.64 days, 95% CI - 1.17 to 2.11; p < 0.00001), lower overall complication rate (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.21-2.45; p < 0.002), lower transfusion rate (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.39-5.02; p = 0.003) and lower major complication rate (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.11-2.79; p < 0.02) compared to OPN. Additionally, the operation time for OPN was shorter than that for RAPN (WMD - 10.77 min, 95% CI - 18.49 to - 3.05, p = 0.006). In comparison with OPN, RAPN exhibits better results in terms of hospital stay, overall complications, blood transfusion rate, and major complications, with no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, minor complications, PSM, ischemia time, and short-term postoperative eGFR decline. However, the operation time of OPN is slightly shorter than that of RAPN.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Kidney Neoplasms; Robotics; Nephrectomy; Blood Transfusion; Ischemia; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37415066
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01652-5 -
Urologic Oncology Sep 2023While surgical management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is curative for many patients, others may relapse and could benefit from adjuvant treatments. Immune checkpoint... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
While surgical management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is curative for many patients, others may relapse and could benefit from adjuvant treatments. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been proposed as a potential adjuvant therapy for improving survival in these patients, but the benefit/risk ratio of ICI in the perioperative setting remains unclear.
METHODS
A systematic review and a meta-analysis of phase III trials of perioperative ICI (anti PD1/PD-L1 alone or in combination with anti-CTLA4 agents) in RCC was conducted.
RESULTS
The analysis included results from 4 phase III trials, comprising 3,407 patients. ICI did not show a significant increase in disease-free survival (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.04; p: 0.11) or overall survival [OS] (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.40-1.34; p: 0.31). High-grade adverse events were more frequent in the immunotherapy arm (OR 2.65; 95% CI 1.53-4.59; p: <0.001), and high-grade treatment-related adverse events were 8 times more frequent in the experimental arm (OR: 8.07; 95% CI: 3.14-20.75; p: <0.001). Subgroup analyses showed statistically significant differences favoring the experimental arm in females (HR: 0.71; 95 CI 0.55-0.92; p: 0.009), in sarcomatoid differentiation (HR: 0.60 95% CI 0.41-0.89; p: 0.01), and PD-L1 positive tumors (HR HR: 0.74; 95% CI 0.61-0.90; p: 0.003). No significant effect was found in patients according to age, type of nephrectomy (radical vs. partial), and stage (M1 without evidence of disease vs. M0 patients).
CONCLUSION
Our comprehensive meta-analysis generally suggests that immunotherapy does not confer a survival advantage in the perioperative setting for RCC, with the exception of one positive study. While the overall results are not statistically significant, individual patient factors and other variables may play a role in determining who benefits from immunotherapy. Therefore, despite the mixed findings, immunotherapy may still be a viable treatment option for certain patients, and further studies are needed to determine which patient subgroups would be most likely to benefit.
Topics: Female; Humans; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; B7-H1 Antigen; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Immunotherapy; Kidney Neoplasms
PubMed: 37331822
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.05.002 -
BJU International Oct 2023To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the advantages and disadvantages of open (OPN), laparoscopic (LPN), and robot-assisted... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the advantages and disadvantages of open (OPN), laparoscopic (LPN), and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) with particular attention to intraoperative, immediate postoperative, as well as longer-term functional and oncological outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-NMA guidelines. Binary data were compared using odds ratios (ORs). Mean differences (MDs) were used for continuous variables. ORs and MDs were extracted from the articles to compare the efficacy of the various surgical approaches. Statistical validity is guaranteed when the 95% credible interval does not include 1.
RESULTS
In total, there were 31 studies included in the NMA with a combined 7869 patients. Of these, 33.7% (2651/7869) underwent OPN, 20.8% (1636/7869) LPN, and 45.5% (3582/7689) RAPN. There was no difference for either LPN or RAPN as compared to OPN in ischaemia time, intraoperative complications, positive surgical margins, operative time or trifecta rate. The estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative complications and length of stay were all significantly reduced in RAPN when compared with OPN. The outcomes of RAPN and LPN were largely similar except the significantly reduced EBL in RAPN.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and NMA suggests that RAPN is the preferable operative approach for patients undergoing surgery for lower-staged RCC.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Robotics; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Nephrectomy; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37259476
DOI: 10.1111/bju.16093 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023To systematically review the differences between radiofrequency ablation and partial nephrectomy in patients with early-stage renal cell carcinoma, and to provide...
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the differences between radiofrequency ablation and partial nephrectomy in patients with early-stage renal cell carcinoma, and to provide evidence-based medical evidence for the choice of surgery for patients with early-stage renal cell carcinoma.
METHODS
According to the search strategy recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration, Chinese databases such as CNKI, VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals Database (VIP), and Wanfang Full-text Database were searched with Chinese search terms. And PubMed and MEDLINE as databases for English literature retrieval. Retrieve the relevant literature on renal cell carcinoma surgical methods published before May 2022, and further screen radiofrequency ablation and partial nephrectomy in patients with renal cell carcinoma The relevant literature on the application is analyzed. RevMan5.3 software was used for heterogeneity test and combined statistical analysis, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis. Analysis, and draw forest plot, using Stata software Begger quantitative assessment of publication bias.
RESULTS
A total of 11 articles were involved, including 2958 patients. According to the Jadad scale, 2 articles were of low quality, and the remaining 9 articles were of high quality. Results of this study demonstrates the advantages of radiofrequency ablation in early-stage renal cell carcinoma. The results of this meta-analysis showed that compared with partial nephrectomy, there was significant difference in the 5-year overall survival rate between radiofrequency ablation and partial nephrectomy and there was a statistically significant difference between the two surgical methods in the 5-year relapse free survival rate of early renal cell carcinoma.
CONCLUSION
1. Compared with partial nephrectomy, the 5-year relapse-free survival rate, the 5-year cancer specific survival rate and the overall 5-year survival rate were higher in the radiofrequency ablation group. 2. Compared with partial nephrectomy, there was no significant difference in the postoperative local tumor recurrence rate of radiofrequency ablation. 3. Compared with partial resection, radiofrequency ablation is more beneficial to patients with renal cell carcinoma.
PubMed: 37182152
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1105877 -
European Urology Open Science Jun 2023The resection technique used to excise tumor during robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is of paramount importance in achieving optimal clinical outcomes. (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
The resection technique used to excise tumor during robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is of paramount importance in achieving optimal clinical outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To provide an overview of the different resection techniques used during RPN, and a pooled analysis of comparative studies.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The systematic review was conducted according to established principles (PROSPERO: CRD42022371640) on November 7, 2022. A population (P: adult patients undergoing RPN), intervention (I: enucleation), comparator (C: enucleoresection or wedge resection), outcome (O: outcome measurements of interest), and study design (S) framework was prespecified to assess study eligibility. Studies reporting a detailed description of resection techniques and/or evaluating the impact of resection technique on outcomes of surgery were included.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Resection techniques used during RPN can be broadly classified as resection (non-anatomic) or enucleation (anatomic). A standardized definition for these is lacking. Out of 20 studies retrieved, nine compared "standard" resection versus enucleation. A pooled analysis did not reveal significant differences in terms of operative time, ischemia time, blood loss, transfusions, or positive margins. Significant differences favoring enucleation were found for clamping management (odds ratio [OR] for renal artery clamping 3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-10.88; = 0.03), overall complications (OR for occurrence 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.87; = 0.01) major complications (OR for occurrence 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.79; = 0.009), length of stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.72 d, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.45; < 0.001), and decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD -2.64 ml/min, 95% CI -5.15 to -0.12; = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS
There is heterogeneity in the reporting of resection techniques used during RPN. The urological community must improve the quality of reporting and research produced accordingly. Positive margins are not specifically related to the resection technique. Focusing on studies comparing standard resection versus enucleation, advantages with tumor enucleation in terms of avoidance of artery clamping, overall/major complications, length of stay, and renal function were found. These data should be considered when planning the RPN resection strategy.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We reviewed studies on robotic surgery for partial kidney removal using different techniques to cut away the kidney tumor. We found that a technique called "enucleation" was associated with similar cancer control outcomes in comparison to the standard technique and had fewer complications, better kidney function after surgery, and a shorter hospital stay.
PubMed: 37182118
DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.008 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023This study aims to perform a pooled analysis to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) between complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic)...
Perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for special types of renal tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic): an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes.
PURPOSE
This study aims to perform a pooled analysis to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) between complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic) and non-complex tumors (nonhilar, exophytic, or solid) and evaluate the effects of renal tumor complexity on outcomes in patients undergoing RAPN.
METHODS
Four databases were systematically searched, including Science, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, to identify relevant studies published in English up to December 2022. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analyses and calculations. The study was registered with PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42023394792).
RESULTS
In total, 14 comparative trials, including 3758 patients were enrolled. Compared to non-complex tumors, complex tumors were associated with a significantly longer warm ischemia time (WMD 3.67 min, 95% CI 1.78, 5.57; p = 0.0001), more blood loss (WMD 22.84 mL, 95% CI 2.31, 43.37; p = 0.03), and a higher rate of major complications (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.50, 3.67; p = 0.0002). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in operative time, length of stay, transfusion rates, conversion to open nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy rates, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline, intraoperative complication, overall complication, positive surgical margins (PSM), local recurrence, and trifecta achievement.
CONCLUSIONS
RAPN can be a safe and effective procedure for complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic) and provides comparable functional and oncologic outcomes to non-complex tumors.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=394792, identifier CRD42023394792.
PubMed: 37152053
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1178592 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2023Urology has been at the forefront of adopting laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques to improve patient outcomes. This systematic review aimed to examine the...
BACKGROUND
Urology has been at the forefront of adopting laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques to improve patient outcomes. This systematic review aimed to examine the literature relating to the learning curves of major urological robotic and laparoscopic procedures.
METHODS
In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic literature search strategy was employed across PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2021, alongside a search of the grey literature. Two independent reviewers completed the article screening and data extraction stages using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale as a quality assessment tool. The review was reported in accordance with AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) guidelines.
RESULTS
Of 3702 records identified, 97 eligible studies were included for narrative synthesis. Learning curves are mapped using an array of measurements including operative time (OT), estimated blood loss, complication rates as well as procedure-specific outcomes, with OT being the most commonly used metric by eligible studies. The learning curve for OT was identified as 10-250 cases for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and 40-250 for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The robot-assisted partial nephrectomy learning curve for warm ischaemia time is 4-150 cases. No high-quality studies evaluating the learning curve for laparoscopic radical cystectomy and for robotic and laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection were identified.
CONCLUSION
There was considerable variation in the definitions of outcome measures and performance thresholds, with poor reporting of potential confounders. Future studies should use multiple surgeons and large sample sizes of cases to identify the currently undefined learning curves for robotic and laparoscopic urological procedures.
Topics: Male; Humans; Robotics; Urology; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Learning Curve; Laparoscopy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37132184
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000345 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2023To evaluate the impact of augmented reality surgical navigation (ARSN) technology on short-term outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN). (Review)
Review
AIM
To evaluate the impact of augmented reality surgical navigation (ARSN) technology on short-term outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN).
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science for eligible studies published through March 28, 2022. Two researchers independently performed the article screening, data extraction and quality review. Data analysis was performed using Cochrane Review Manager software.
RESULTS
A total of 583 patients from eight studies were included in the analysis, with 313 in the ARSN-assisted PN group (AR group) and 270 in the conventional PN group (NAR group). ARSN-assisted PN showed better outcomes than conventional surgery in terms of operative time, estimated blood loss, global ischemia rate, warm ischemia time, and enucleation rate. However, there were no significant differences in the rate of Conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN), postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), positive margin rate, and postoperative complication rate.
CONCLUSION
The utilization of ARSN can improve the perioperative safety of PN. Compared with conventional PN, ARSN-assisted PN can reduce intraoperative blood loss, shorten operative time, and improve renal ischemia. Although direct evidence is lacking, our results still suggest a potential advantage of ARSN in improving renal recovery after PN. However, as the ARSN system is still in an exploratory stage, its relevance in PN have been poorly reported. Additional high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies will be required to confirm the effect of ARSN on PN.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=301798, identifier PROSPERO ID: CRD42022301798.
PubMed: 37123539
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1067275 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jun 2023The present study aimed to conduct a pooled analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) with open partial nephrectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The present study aimed to conduct a pooled analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) with open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in patients with complex renal tumors (defined as PADUA or RENAL score ≥7).
METHODS
The present study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JS9/A394 . We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases until October 2022. MIPN and OPN-controlled trials for complex renal tumors were included. The primary outcomes were perioperative results, complications, renal function, and oncologic outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 2405 patients were included in 13 studies. MIPN outperformed OPN in terms of hospital stay [weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.84 days, 95% CI -2.35 to -1.33; P <0.00001], blood loss (WMD -52.42 ml, 95% CI -71.43 to -33.41; P <0.00001), transfusion rates [odds ratio (OR) 0.34, 95% CI 0.17-0.67; P =0.002], major complications (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.86; P =0.007) and overall complications (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.31-0.59; P <0.0001), while operative time, warm ischemia time, conversion to radical nephrectomy rates, estimated glomerular decline, positive surgical margins, local recurrence, overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and cancer-specific survival were not significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS
The present study demonstrated that MIPN was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay, less blood loss, and fewer complications in treating complex renal tumors. MIPN may be considered a better treatment for patients with complex tumors when technically feasible.
Topics: Humans; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Kidney Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Nephrectomy
PubMed: 37094827
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000397 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2023Studies have shown that remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) can effectively attenuate ischemic-reperfusion injury in the heart and brain, but the effect on... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Studies have shown that remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) can effectively attenuate ischemic-reperfusion injury in the heart and brain, but the effect on ischemic-reperfusion injury in patients with kidney transplantation or partial nephrectomy remains controversial. The main objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate whether RIC provides renal protection after renal ischemia-reperfusion injury in patients undergoing kidney transplantation or partial nephrectomy.
METHODS
A computer-based search was conducted to retrieve relevant publications from the PubMed database, Embase database, Cochrane Library and Web of Science database. We then conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that met our study inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
Eleven eligible studies included a total of 1,145 patients with kidney transplantation or partial nephrectomy for systematic review and meta-analysis, among whom 576 patients were randomly assigned to the RIC group and the remaining 569 to the control group. The 3-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was improved in the RIC group, which was statistically significant between the two groups on kidney transplantation [< 0.001; mean difference (MD) = 2.74, confidence interval (CI): 1.41 to 4.06; = 14%], and the 1- and 2-day postoperative Scr levels in the RIC group decreased, which was statistically significant between the two groups on kidney transplantation (1-day postoperative: < 0.001; MD = 0.10, CI: 0.05 to 0.15, = 0; 2-day postoperative: = 0.006; MD = 0.41, CI: 0.12 to 0.70, = 0), but at other times, there was no significant difference between the two groups in Scr levels. The incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) decreased, but there was no significant difference (= 0.60; 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.26). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of cross-clamp time, cold ischemia time, warm ischemic time, acute rejection (AR), graft loss or length of hospital stay.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis showed that the effect of remote ischemia conditioning on reducing serum creatinine (Scr) and improving estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) seemed to be very weak, and we did not observe a significant protective effect of RIC on renal ischemic-reperfusion. Due to small sample sizes, more studies using stricter inclusion criteria are needed to elucidate the nephroprotective effect of RIC in renal surgery in the future.
PubMed: 37091267
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1024650