Does pure robotic partial nephrectomy provide similar perioperative outcomes when compared to the combined laparoscopic–robotic approach?

Abstract

Laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy have become the preferred option for surgical management of incidentally discovered small renal tumors. Currently there is no consensus on which aspects of the procedure should be performed laparoscopically versus robotically. We believe that combining a laparoscopic exposure and hilar dissection followed by tumor extirpation and renorrhaphy with robotic assistance provides improved perioperative outcomes compared to a pure robotic approach alone. We performed a comparison of perioperative outcomes between combined laparoscopic–robotic partial nephrectomy—or hybrid procedure—and pure robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN). A multi-center retrospective analysis of patients undergoing RPN and hybrid PN using the da Vinci S system^® was performed. Patient data were reviewed for demographic and perioperative variables. Statistical analysis was performed using the Welch t test and linear regression, and nonparametric tests with similar significance results. Thirty-one patients underwent RPN while 77 patients underwent hybrid PN between 2007 and 2011. Preoperative variables were comparable in both groups with the exception of lesion size and nephrometry score which were significantly higher in patients undergoing hybrid PN. Length of surgery, estimated blood loss and morphine used were significantly less in the hybrid group, while warm ischemia time was significantly longer. The difference in WIT was accounted for in this data by adjusting for nephrometry score. In our multi-center series, the hybrid approach was associated with a shorter operative time, reduced blood loss and lower narcotic usage. We believe this approach is a valid alternative to RPN.