Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-06-2014 | Topic Paper

Current controversies and challenges in robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies

Authors: Aaron A. Laviana, Jim C. Hu

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 3/2014

Abstract

Introduction

Recent studies demonstrate that partial versus radical nephrectomy confers a survival advantage while lowering the risk of severe chronic kidney disease. Open partial nephrectomy remains the gold standard, but the use of minimally invasive approaches is expanding.

Methods

Using a MEDLINE literature search, we reviewed all relevant literature between 2000 and 2014. Fifty-one articles were left for review after filtering for inclusion of trends, learning curve, perioperative outcomes, warm ischemia time, and costs.

Results

Partial nephrectomy use has increased over the past decade accounting for 24.7 % of all surgeries performed for the treatment of organ-confined renal masses in 2008. The introduction of robotic technology has continued to alter the landscape accounting for 47 % of all partial nephrectomies at academic US centers in 2011, though a center bias and publication bias likely exist. A slower adoption rate has been seen at non-academic centers and those in low-income areas. The learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy has been shorter than for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, explaining, in part, why the rate of partial nephrectomy remained relatively stagnant before the robotic-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy, despite an increase in the detection of small renal masses. Operative and warm ischemia time remain shortest for open partial nephrectomy, though it is associated with the highest blood loss and longest hospital stay. Finally, open partial nephrectomy remains the least costly modality.

Conclusions

Each approach to partial nephrectomy has its advantages and disadvantages, and continued effort must be applied to comparative effectiveness research for nephron-sparing treatments for renal cell carcinoma.

Kane CJ, Mallin K, Ritchey J et al (2008) Renal cell cancer stage migration: analysis of the National Cancer Data Base. Cancer 113(1):78–83PubMedCrossRef

Motzer RJ, Agarwal N, Beard C et al (2009) NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: kidney cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7(6):618–630PubMed

Ljungberg B, Cowan NC, Hanbury DC et al (2010) EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2010 update. Eur Urol 58(3):398–406PubMedCrossRef

Huang WC, Elkin EB, Levey AS et al (2009) Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors—is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes? J Urol 181(1):55–61PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Huang WC, Levey AS, Serio AM et al (2006) Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with renal cortical tumours. A retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 7(9):735–740PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Miller DC, Schonlau M, Litwin MS et al (2008) Renal and cardiovascular morbidity after partial or radical nephrectomy. Cancer 112(3):511–520PubMedCrossRef

Thompson RH, Boorjian SA, Lohse CM et al (2008) Radical nephrectomy for pT1a renal masses may be associated with decreased overall survival compared with partial nephrectomy. J Urol 179(2):468–471 discussion 472-3PubMedCrossRef

Thompson RH, Siddiqui S, Lohse CM (2009) Partial versus radical nephrectomy for 4 to 7 cm renal cortical tumors. J Urol 182(6):2601–2606PubMedCrossRef

Hollenbeck BK, Taub DA, Miller DC et al (2006) National utilization trends of partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a case of underutilization? J Urol 67(2):254–259CrossRef

10.

Van Poppel H, Da Pozzo L, Albrecht W et al (2011) A prospective, randomised EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the oncologic outcome of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 59(4):543–552PubMedCrossRef

11.

Patel SG, Penson DF, Pabla B et al (2012) National trends in the use of partial nephrectomy: a rising tide that has not lifted all boats. J Urol 187(3):816–821PubMedCrossRef

12.

Link RE, Bhayani SB, Allaf ME et al (2005) Exploring the learning curve, pathological outcomes and perioperative morbidity of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy performed for renal masses. J Urol 173(5):1690–1694PubMedCrossRef

13.

Gill IS, Kamoi K, Aron M (2010) 800 laparoscopic partial nephrectomies: a single surgeon series. J Urol 183(1):34–41PubMedCrossRef

14.

Abouassaly R, Alibhai SM, Tomlinson G et al (2010) Unintended consequences of laparoscopic surgery on partial nephrectomy for kidney cancer. J Urol 183(2):467–472PubMedCrossRef

15.

Kim SP, Shah ND, Weight CJ et al (2011) Contemporary trends in nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma in the United States: results from a population based cohort. J Urol 186(5):1779–1785PubMedCrossRef

16.

Patel HD, Mullins JK, Pierorazio PM et al (2013) Trends in renal surgery: robotic technology is associated with increased use of partial nephrectomy. J Urol 189(4):1229–1235PubMedCrossRef

17.

Merseburger AS, Herrmann TR, Shariat SF et al (2013) European associated of urology. EAU guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology. Eur Urol 64(2):277–291PubMedCrossRef

18.

Dulabon LM, Lowrance WT, Russo P, Huang WC (2010) Trends in renal tumor surgery delivery within the United States. Cancer 116(10):2316–2321PubMed

19.

Porter MP, Lin DW (2007) Trends in renal cancer surgery and patient provider characteristics associated with partial nephrectomy in the United States. Urol Oncol 25(4):298–302PubMedCrossRef

20.

Breau RH, Crispen PL, Jimenez RE et al (2010) Outcome of stage T2 or greater renal cell cancer treated with partial nephrectomy. J Urol 183(3):903–908PubMedCrossRef

21.

Gill IS, Colombo JR Jr, Frank I et al (2005) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors. J Urol 174(3):850–853PubMedCrossRef

22.

Lattouf JB, Beri A, D’Ambros OF et al (2008) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: technique and results. Eur Urol 54(2):409–416PubMedCrossRef

23.

Dulabon LM, Kaouk JH, Haber GP et al (2011) Multi-institutional analysis of robotic partial nephrectomy for hilar versus nonhilar lesions in 446 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 59(3):325–330PubMedCrossRef

24.

Rogers CG, Singh A, Blatt AM et al (2008) Robotic partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors: surgical technique. Eur Urol 53(3):514–521PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

25.

Shiroki R, Maruyama T, Kusaka M et al (2011) Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy using daVinci S-surgical system for localized renal tumor: report of initial five cases. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 102(5):679–685PubMed

26.

Miller DC, Hollingsworth JM, Hafez KS et al (2006) Partial nephrectomy for small renal masses: an emerging quality of care concern? J Urol 175(3 Pt 1):853–857PubMedCrossRef

27.

Kaul S, Laungani R, Sarle da R (2007) Vinci-assisted robotic partial nephrectomy: technique and results at a mean of 15 months of follow-up. Eur Urol 51(1):186–191 discussion 191–192PubMedCrossRef

28.

Phillips CK, Taneja SS, Stifelman MD (2005) Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: the NYU technique. J Endourol 19(4):441–445PubMedCrossRef

29.

Haseebuddin M, Benway BM, Cabello JM (2010) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: evaluation of learning curve for an experienced renal surgeon. J Endourol 24(1):57–61PubMedCrossRef

30.

Lavery HJ, Small AC, Samadi DB, Palese MA (2011) Transition from laparoscopic to robotic partial nephrectomy: the learning curve for an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. JSLS 15(3):291–297PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

31.

Deane LA, Lee HJ, Box GN et al (2008) Robotic versus standard laparoscopic partial/wedge nephrectomy: a comparison of intraoperative and perioperative results from a single institution. J Endourol 22(5):947–952PubMedCrossRef

32.

Pierorazio PM, Patel HD, Feng T et al (2011) Robotic-assisted versus traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: comparison of outcomes and evaluation of learning curve. J Urol 78(4):813–819CrossRef

33.

Aboumarzouk OM, Stein RJ, Eyraud R et al (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 62(6):1023–1033PubMedCrossRef

34.

Kutikov A, Uzzo RG (2009) The R.E.N.A.L. nephrotomy score; a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol 182(3):844–853PubMedCrossRef

35.

Lucas SM, Mellon MJ, Erntsberger L, Sundaram CP (2012) A comparison of robotic, laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. JSLS 16(4):581–587PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

36.

Faria EF, Caputo PA, Wood CG et al (2014) Robotic partial nephrectomy shortens warm ischemia time, reducing suturing time kinetics even for an experienced laparoscopic surgeon: a comparative analysis. World J Urol 32(1):265–271PubMedCrossRef

37.

Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG et al (2009) Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: a multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol 182(3):866–872PubMedCrossRef

38.

Simhan J, Smaldone MC, Tsai KJ et al (2012) Perioperative outcomes of robotic and open parital nephrectomy for moderately and highly complex renal lesions. J Urol 187(6):2000–2004PubMedCrossRef

39.

Becker F, Van Poppel H, Hakenberg OW (2009) Assessing the impact of ischaemia time during partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 56(4):625–634PubMedCrossRef

40.

Lane BR, Novick AC, Babineau D et al (2008) Comparison of laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy for tumor in a solitary kidney. J Urol 179(3):847–851PubMedCrossRef

41.

Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM et al (2010) Every minute counts when the renal hilum is clamped during partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 58(3):340–345PubMedCrossRef

42.

Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM et al (2010) Comparison of warm ischemia versus no ischemia during partial nephrectomy on a solitary kidney. Eur Urol 58(3):331–336PubMedCrossRef

43.

Nguyen MM, Gill IS (2008) Halving ischemia time during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Urol 179(2):627–632 discussion 632PubMedCrossRef

44.

Lane BR, Campbell SC, Gill IS (2013) 10-year oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. J Urol 190(1):44–49PubMedCrossRef

45.

Hew MN, Basekiogly B, Barwari K et al (2011) Critical appraisal of the PADUA classificiation and assessment of the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy. J Urol 186(1):42–46PubMedCrossRef

46.

Waldert M, Waalkes S, Klatte T et al (2010) External validation of the preoperative anatomical classification for prediction of complications related to nephron-sparing surgery. World J Urol 28(4):531–535PubMedCrossRef

47.

Ficarra V, Bhayani S, Porter J et al (2012) Predictors of warm ischemia time and perioperative complications in a multicenter, international series of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 61(2):395–402PubMedCrossRef

48.

Eisenberg MS, Patil MB, Thangathurai D, Gill IS (2011) Innovations in laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy: a novel ‘zero ischemia’ technique. Curr Opin Urol 21(2):93–98PubMedCrossRef

49.

Mir SA, Cadeddu JA, Sleeper JP, Lotan Y (2011) Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 25(3):447–453PubMedCrossRef

50.

Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs—the case of robot-assisted surgery. NEJM 363(8):701–704PubMedCrossRef

51.

Alemozaffar M, Chang SL, Kacker R et al (2013) Comparing costs of robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 27(5):560–565PubMedCrossRef

Title: Current controversies and challenges in robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies
Authors: Aaron A. Laviana
Jim C. Hu
Publication date: 01-06-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1277-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Current controversies and challenges in robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2014

PSA-nadir at 1 year as a sound contemporary prognostic factor for low-dose-rate iodine-125 seeds brachytherapy

Editorial for a special issue on kidney transplant

The impact of biofilm-producing bacteria on chronic bacterial prostatitis treatment: results from a longitudinal cohort study

Extracorporeal lithotripsy endoscopically controlled by ureterorenoscopy (LECURS): a new concept for the treatment of kidney stones—first clinical experience using digital ureterorenoscopes

The contemporary role on surgery in the management of renal masses

Thinking beyond surgery in the management of renal cell carcinoma: the risk to die from renal cell carcinoma and competing risks of death