Faculty Collaboration Database

Robotic versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: a large multi-institutional analysis (ROSULA Collaborative Group). World J Urol 2019 Nov;37(11):2439-2450

Date

02/09/2019

Pubmed ID

30734072

DOI

10.1007/s00345-019-02657-2

Scopus ID

2-s2.0-85061335529 (requires institutional sign-in at Scopus site)   27 Citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of robotic radical nephrectomy (RRN) to those of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for large renal masses.

METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of RRN and LRN cases performed for large (≥ cT2) renal masses from 2004 to 2017 and collected in the multi-institutional international database (ROSULA: RObotic SUrgery for LArge renal masses). Peri-operative, functional, and oncologic outcomes were compared between each approach. Descriptive analyses were performed and presented as medians with interquartile ranges. Inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted multivariable analyses were used to identify predictors of peri-operative complications. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression models were used to assess survival outcomes.

RESULTS: A total of 941 patients (RRN = 404, LRN = 537) were identified. There was no difference in terms of gender, age, and clinical tumor size. Over the study period, RRN had an annual increase of 11.75% (95% CI [7.34, 17.01] p < 0.001) and LRN had an annual decline of 5.39% (95% CI [-6.94, -3.86] p < 0.001). Patients undergoing RRN had higher BMI (27.6 [IQR 24.8-31.1] vs. 26.5 [24.1-30.0] kg/m², p < 0.01). Operative duration was longer for RRN (185.0 [150.0-237.2] vs. 126 [90.8-180.0] min, p < 0.001). Length of stay was shorter for RRN (3.0 [2.0-4.0] vs. 5.0 [4.0-7.0] days, p < 0.001). RRN cases presented more advanced disease (higher pathologic staging [pT3-4 52.5 vs. 24.2%, p < 0.001], histologic grade [high grade 49.3 vs. 30.4%, p < 0.001], and rate of nodal disease [pN1 5.4 vs. 1.9%, p < 0.01]). Surgical approach did not represent an independent risk factor for peri-operative complications (OR 1.81 95% CI [0.97-3.39], adjusted p = 0.2). The main study limitation is the retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest known multi-center comparison between RRN and LRN. The two procedures seem to offer similar peri-operative outcomes. Notably, RRN has been increasingly utilized, especially in the setting of more advanced and surgically challenging disease without increasing the risk of peri-operative complications.

Author List

Anele UA, Marchioni M, Yang B, Simone G, Uzzo RG, Lau C, Mir MC, Capitanio U, Porter J, Jacobsohn K, de Luyk N, Mari A, Chang K, Fiori C, Sulek J, Mottrie A, White W, Perdona S, Quarto G, Bindayi A, Ashrafi A, Schips L, Berardinelli F, Zhang C, Gallucci M, Ramirez-Backhaus M, Larcher A, Kilday P, Liao M, Langenstroer P, Dasgupta P, Challacombe B, Kutikov A, Minervini A, Rha KH, Sundaram CP, Hampton LJ, Porpiglia F, Aron M, Derweesh I, Autorino R

Author

Peter Langenstroer MD Professor in the Urologic Surgery department at Medical College of Wisconsin

MESH terms used to index this publication - Major topics in bold

Aged
Female
Humans
Kidney Neoplasms
Laparoscopy
Male
Middle Aged
Nephrectomy
Retrospective Studies
Robotic Surgical Procedures
Treatment Outcome