Abstract
A Satinsky clamp may be a backup option for hilar clamping during robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) if there are challenges with application of bulldog clamps, but there are potential safety concerns. We evaluate outcomes of RPN using Satinsky vs. bulldog clamps, and provide tips for safe use of the Satinsky as a backup option. Using a multi-center database, we identified 1073 patients who underwent RPN between 2006 and 2013, and had information available about method of hilar clamping (bulldog clamp vs. Satinsky clamp). Patient baseline characteristics, tumor features, and perioperative outcomes were compared between the Satinsky and bulldog clamp groups. A Satinsky clamp was used for hilar clamping in 94 (8.8 %) RPN cases, and bulldog clamps were used in 979 (91.2 %) cases. The use of a Satinsky clamp was associated with greater operative time (198 vs. 175 min, p < 0.001), estimated blood loss (EBL, 200 vs. 100 ml, p < 0.001), warm ischemia time (WIT, 20 vs. 19 min, p = 0.036), transfusion rate (12.8 vs. 4.8 %, p = 0.001), and hospital stay (3 vs. 2 days, p < 0.001). Tumor characteristics and number of renal vessels were similar between groups. There were six intraoperative complications in the Satinsky clamp group, but none were directly related to the Satinsky clamp. On multivariable analysis, the use of the Satinsky clamp was not associated with increase in intraoperative or Clavien ≥3 postoperative complications, positive surgical margin rate or percentage change in estimated glomerular filtration rate. A Satinsky clamp can be a backup option for hilar clamping during challenging RPN cases, but requires careful technique, and was rarely necessary.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Novick AC, Campbell SC, Belldegrun A, Blute ML, Chow GK, Derweesh IH, Faraday MM, Kaouk J, Leveillee RJ, Matin SF, Russo P, Uzzo RG (2009) Guideline for management of the clinical stage 1 renal mass. J Urol 182(4):1271–1279
Ljungberg B, Hanbury DC, Kuczyk MA, Merseburger AS, Mulders PF, Patard JJ, Sinescu IC (2007) Renal cell carcinoma guideline. Eur Urol 51(6):1502–1510. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.03.035
Gill IS, Desai MM, Kaouk JH, Meraney AM, Murphy DP, Sung GT, Novick AC (2002) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumor: duplicating open surgical techniques. J Urol 167(2 Pt 1):469–476 (discussion 475–466)
Rogers C, Sand M, Petros F, Stifelman MD (2015) Complications of laparoscopic and robotic nephron sparing surgery. http://laparoscopy.blogs.com/prevention_management_3/2011/03/complications-of-laparoscopic-and-robotic-nephron-sparing-surgery.html. Accessed 27 April 2015
Yoon PD, Chalasani V, Woo HH (2013) Use of Clavien-Dindo classification in reporting and grading complications after urological surgical procedures: analysis of 2010–2012. J Urol 190(4):1271–1274. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.025
Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG, Dulabon LM, Patel MN, Lipkin M, Wang AJ, Stifelman MD (2009) Robot assisted partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: a multi-institutional analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol 182(3):866–872. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.05.037
Sukumar S, Rogers CG (2011) Robotic partial nephrectomy: surgical technique. BJU Int 108(6 Pt 2):942–947. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10457.x
Nepple KG, Sandhu GS, Rogers CG, Allaf ME, Kaouk JH, Figenshau RS, Stifelman MD, Bhayani SB (2012) Description of a multicenter safety checklist for intraoperative hemorrhage control while clamped during robotic partial nephrectomy. Patient Saf Surg 6:8. doi:10.1186/1754-9493-6-8
Azhar RA, Metcalfe C, Gill IS (2015) Anatomic partial nephrectomy: technique evolution. Curr Opin Urol 25(2):95–99. doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000000140
Rogers CG, Ghani KR, Kumar RK, Jeong W, Menon M (2013) Robotic partial nephrectomy with cold ischemia and on-clamp tumor extraction: recapitulating the open approach. Eur Urol 63(3):573–578. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.029
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None of the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
N. Abdullah and H. Rahbar contributed equally to the production of this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Abdullah, N., Rahbar, H., Barod, R. et al. Use of the Satinsky clamp for hilar clamping during robotic partial nephrectomy: indications, technique, and multi-center outcomes. J Robotic Surg 11, 47–51 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0611-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0611-y