To compare the functional and operative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with selective arterial clamping guided by near infrared fluorescence imaging (NIRF-RAPN) versus a cohort of patients who underwent standard RAPN without selective arterial clamping (S-RAPN). 62 consecutive patients underwent RAPN from January 2016 to May 2017: the last 20 patients underwent NIRF-RAPN. Preoperative and postoperative renal scan at 1 month were performed to evaluate the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of the operated renal unit and total function. Functional and operative outcomes of cases were compared with a cohort of 42 patients undergoing S-RAPN. Selective clamping was performed in 15 patients (75%), whereas five (25%) cases were converted to S-RAPN, due to incomplete ischemic appearance of the tumor after selective clamping. Median tumor diameter was 40 mm in both groups. Median selective clamping was 24 min in both groups. Operative time (206’ vs 190’) and blood loss (200 vs 170 cc) were comparable. No major complications have been reported in the NIRF-RAPN group, whereas three acute hemorrhages with embolization were found in the S-RAPN group. The analysis of renal scan data revealed that a greater loss of GFR in the operated renal unit was observed after S-RAPN compared to NIRF-RAPN [21.5% vs. 5.5%; p = 0.046], as well as total GFR loss [8% vs 0%; p = 0.007]. The use of NIRF imaging was associated with improved short-term renal functional outcomes compared to RAPN without selective arterial clamping. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study analyzing the GFR obtained from renal scan.
Near infrared fluorescence Robotic Partial nephrectomy Renal ischemia Renal scan
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
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.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Urological A et al (2009) Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal mass. J Urol 182:1271–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ljungberg B, Cowan NC, Hanbury DC et al (2010) European Association of Urology Guideline, EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2010 update. Eur Urol 58:398–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luciani LG, Chiodini S, Mattevi D, Cai T et al (2017) Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy provides better operative outcomes as compared to the laparoscopic and open approaches: results from a prospective cohort study. J Robot Surg 11(3):333–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belldegrun AS, Tsui KH, deKernion JB et al (1999) Efficacy of nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma: analysis based on the new 1997 tumor-node-metastasis staging system. J Clin Oncol 17:2868–2875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fergany AR, Hafez KS, Novick AC (2000) Long-term results of nephron sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: 10-year follow-up. J Urol 163:442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattard JJ, Shvarts O, Lam JS et al (2004) Safety and efficacy of partial nephrectomy for all T1 tumors based on an international multicenter experience. J Urol 171(pt 1):2181–2185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahernik S, Roos F, Hampel C et al (2006) Nephron sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma with normal contralateral kidney: 25 year of experience. J Urol 175:2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson RH, Siddiqui S, Lohse CM (2009) Partial versus radical nephrectomy for 4 to 7 cm renal cortical tumors. J Urol 182:2601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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 181:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weight CJ, Larson BT, Fergany AF et al (2010) Nephrectomy induced chronic renal insufficiency is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death and death from any cause in patients with localized cT1b renal masses. J Urol 183:1317–1323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons MN, Hillyer SP, Lee BH et al (2012) Functional recovery after partial nephrectomy: effects of volume loss and ischemic injury. J Urol 187:1667–1673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM et al (2010) Every minute counts when the renal hilum is clamped during partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 58:340–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abreu ALC, Gill IS, Desai MM (2011) Zero-ischaemia robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) for hilar tumours. BJU Int 108:948–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simone G, Papalia R, Guaglianone S et al (2011) Zero ischemia laparoscopic partial nephrectomy after superselective transarterial tumour embolization for tumours with moderate nephrometry scoreL long-term results of a single-center experience. J Endourol 25:1443–1446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill IS, Eisenberg MS, Aron M et al (2011) “Zero-ischemia” partial nephrectomy: novel laparoscopic and robotic technique. Eur Urol 59:128–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill IS, Patil MB, Abreu AL et al (2012) Zero ischemia anatomical partial nephrectomy: a novel approach. J Urol 187:807–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borofsky MS, Gill IS, Hemal AK et al (2013) Near-infrared fluorescence imaging to facilitate superselective arterial clamping during zero-ischaemia robotic partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 111:604–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harke N, Schoen G, Schiefelbein F et al (2014) Selective clamping under the usage of near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a single-surgeon matched-pair study. World J Urol 32:1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjurlin MA, Gan M, McClintock TR et al (2014) Near-infrared fluorescence imaging: emerging applications in robotic upper urinary tract surgery. Eur Urol 65:793–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of Surgical Complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 Patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J et al (1994) Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 47:1245–1251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rais-Bahrami S, George AK, Herati AS et al (2012) Off-clamp versus complete hilar control laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: comparison by clinical stage. BJU Int 109:1376–1381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novak R, Mulligan D, Abaza R (2012) Robotic partial nephrectomy without renal ischemia. Urology 79:1296–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macchi V, Crestani A, Porzionato A et al (2017) Anatomical study of renal arterial vasculature and its potential impact on partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 120(1):83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves FT (1954) The anatomy of the intrarenal arteries and its application to the segmental resection of the kidney. Br J Surg 42:132–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Luyk N, Namdarian B, Challacombe B (2017) Touching the future: three-dimensional printing facilitates preoperative planning, realistic simulation and enhanced precision in robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 119(4):510–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luciani LG, Chiodini S, Donner D et al (2016) Early impact of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy on renal function as assessed by renal scintigraphy. J Robot Surg 10(2):123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar