Pre-operative factors that predict trifecta and pentafecta in robotic assisted partial nephrectomy
To prospectively evaluate factors that predict achievement of trifecta and pentafecta following robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Clinical variables of 330 RAPNs performed for a single renal tumor were analyzed for association with post-operative trifecta and pentafecta achievement. Trifecta was defined as warm ischemia time (WIT) ≤ 25 min, negative surgical margins, and no post-operative complications ≥ Clavien grade 3. Pentafecta was defined as trifecta criteria plus > 90% preservation of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and no stage upgrade of chronic kidney disease from pre-operative up to 12 months post-RAPN. After adjustment for multiple testing, p < 0.007 was considered statistically significant. Among 330 patients, trifecta was achieved in 280 patients (84.8%). Among the 152 patients with eGFR available at 12 months following RAPN, pentafecta was achieved in 39 (25.8%). A lower R.E.N.A.L. score was associated with increased odds of achieving trifecta (OR 3.38, p < 0.001) and pentafecta (OR 2.83 p < 0.001). No other pre-operative characteristics were associated with trifecta or pentafecta. Patients who achieved trifecta had a lower median estimated blood loss (EBL) (300 vs 400, p = 0.029) and shorter operative time (223 vs 234 min, p = 0.004) compared to patients without trifecta. There were no significant differences in EBL or operative time in patients who achieved or failed to achieve pentafecta. R.E.N.A.L score is the only pre-operative variable associated with achieving trifecta and pentafecta following RAPN. Lower EBL and operative time are associated with trifecta but not pentafecta outcomes.
KeywordsTrifecta Pentafecta Robotic surgery Robotic assisted partial nephrectomy R.E.N.A.L. score
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Authors Amanda E. Kahn, Ashley M. Shumate, Colleen T. Ball, and David D. Thiel declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.
Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
- 10.Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 6:65–70Google Scholar
- 12.Tibshirani R (1996) Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 58:267–288Google Scholar
- 14.Mayer WA, Godoy G, Choi JM, Goh AC, Bian SX, Link RE (2012) Higher RENAL nephrometry score is predictive of longer warm ischemia time and collecting system entry during laparoscopic and robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy. Urology 79:1052–1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.01.048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Kim DK, Kim LHC, Raheem AA et al (2016) Comparison of trifecta and pentafecta outcomes between T1a and T1b renal masses following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) with minimum 1 year follow up: can RAPN for T1b renal masses be feasible? PloS One 11:e0151738. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.phone.0151738 CrossRefGoogle Scholar