Systematic Review of Robotic Nephrectomy for Kidney Cancer
Main Article Content
Keywords
Robotic nephrectomy, kidney cancer, renal cell carcinoma, systematic review,
Abstract
Robotic nephrectomy has become an increasingly preferred surgical technique for managing renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This review aims to sys-tematically evaluate existing literature on the safety, efficacy, clinical outcomes, and associated costs of robotic nephrectomy, especially in relation to tumor dimensions and other pertinent patient factors. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we performed an extensive literature search across major databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) from incep-tion to October 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies that compared robotic nephrectomy with open or laparoscopic nephrectomy. Outcomes analyzed included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, complication rates, length of hospital stay, oncological outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. The Egger test was used to assess publication bias. The review incorporated 30 studies involving 5,432 patients who underwent robotic nephrectomy. Key findings indicated that robotic nephrectomy resulted in significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (mean difference of −85 mL; p < 0.001) and shorter hospital stays (mean difference of −1.3 days). Tumor size had a notable impact on surgical outcomes, with larger tumors (≥7 cm) being associated with prolonged operative times and slightly higher complication rates. Robotic nephrectomy was also associated with higher costs compared to conventional surgical techniques; however, reduced readmission rates offset some of these costs. Oncological outcomes for robotic nephrectomy were comparable to those of open nephrectomy. Robotic nephrectomy is a safe and effective approach for kidney cancer that demonstrates advantages in perioperative recovery and surgical precision, particularly for smaller tumors. While costs may be higher, the clinical benefits and potential long-term savings from decreased postoperative complications recommend its use. Further high-quality RCTs are essential to validate these findings.
References
2. Klingler DW, Hemstreet GP, Balaji KC. Feasibility of robotic radical nephrectomy—Initial results of single-institution pilot study. Urology. 2005;65(6):1086–1089. https://doi.10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.020
3. Gill IS, Sung GT, Hsu TH, Meraney AM. Robotic remote laparoscopic nephrectomy and adrenalectomy: The initial experience. Journal of Urology. 2000;164(6):2082–2085. https://doi.10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66973-X
4. Guillonneau B, Jayet C, Tewari A, Vallancien G. Robot assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. Journal of Urology. 2001;166(1):200–201. https://doi.10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66111-3
5. Horgan S, Vanuno D. Robots in laparoscopic surgery. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques. Part A. 2001;11:415–419. https://doi.10.1089/10926420152761950
6. Horgan S, Vanuno D, Benedetti E. Early experience with robotically assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques. 2002;12(1): 64–70. https://doi.10.1097/00129689-200202000-00011
7. Rogers C, Laungani R, Krane LS, Bhandari A, Bhandari M, Menon M. Robotic nephrectomy for the treatment of benign and malignant disease. British Journal of Urology International. 2008;102:1660–1665. https://doi.10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07895.x
8. Dogra PN, Abrol N, Singh P, Gupta NP. Outcomes following robotic radical nephrectomy: a single-center experience. Urol Int. 2012;89(1):78-82. doi: 10.1159/000336627. Epub 2012 Apr 25. PMID: 22538353.
9. Rogers CG, Laungani R, Bhandari A, Krane LS, Eun D, Patel MN, et al. Maximizing console surgeon independence during robot-assisted renal surgery by using the Fourth Arm and TilePro. Journal of Endourology. 2009;23:115–121. https://doi.10.1089/end.2008.0416
10. Abaza R. Initial series of robotic radical nephrectomy with vena caval tumor thrombectomy. European Urology. 2011;59(4):652–656. https://doi.10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.038
11. Lorenzo EI, Jeong W, Oh CK, Chung BH, Choi YD, Rha KH. Robotics applied in laparoscopic kidney surgery: The Yonsei University experience of 127 cases. Urology. 2011;77(1):114–118. https://doi.10.1016/j.urology.2010.02.011
12. White MA, Autorino R, Spana G, Laydner H, Hillyer SP, Khanna R, et al.. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy: Surgical technique and comparative outcomes. European Urology. 2011;59(5):815–822. https://doi.10.1016/j.eururo.2011.02.020
13. Nazemi T, Galich A, Sterrett S, Klingler D, Smith L, Balaji KC. Radical nephrectomy performed by open, laparoscopy with or without hand-assistance or robotic methods by the same surgeon produces comparable perioperative results. International Brazilian Journal of Urology. 2006;32:15–22. https://doi.10.1590/S1677-55382006000100003
14. Boger M, Lucas SM, Popp SC, Gardner TA, Sundaram CP. Comparison of robot-assisted nephrectomy with laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons. 2010;14:374–380. https://doi.10.4293/108680810X12924466007124
15. Hemal AK, Kumar A. A prospective comparison of laparoscopic and robotic radical nephrectomy for T1-2N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. World Journal of Urology. 2009;27:89–94. https://doi.10.1007/s00345-008-0321-9
16. Ploumidis A, Panoskaltsis T, Gavresea T, Yiannou P, Yiannakou N, Pavlakis K. Tumor seeding incidentally found two years after robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy for papillary renal cell carcinoma: A case report and review of the literature. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports. 2013;4(6):561–564. https://doi.10.1016/j.ijscr.2013.03.031
17. Yamg DY, Monn MF, Bahler CD, Sundaram CP. Does robotic assistance confer an economic benefit during laparoscopic radical nephrectomy? Journal of Urology. 2014;191(4):1091–1095. https://doi.10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.004
18. Merseburger AS, Herrmann TR, Shariat SF, Kyriazis I, Nagele U, Traxer O, Liatsikos EN. EAU guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology. European Urology. 2013; 64(2): 277–291. https://doi.10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.034
19. Disanto V, Pansadoro V, Portoghese F, Scalese GA, Romano M. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma with infrahepatic vena caval thrombus. European Urology. 2005;47(3):352–356. https://doi.10.1016/j.eururo.2004.11.010
20. Varkarakis IM, Bhayani SB, Allaf ME, Inagaki T, Gonzalgo ML, Jarrett TW. Laparoscopic-assisted nephrectomy with inferior vena cava tumor thrombectomy: Preliminary results. Urology. 2004;64(5):925–929. https://doi.10.1016/j.urology.2004.05.044
21. Martin GL, Castle EP, Martin AD, Desai PJ, Lallas CD, Ferrigni RG, et al. Outcomes of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in the setting of vena caval and renal vein thrombus: Seven-year experience. Journal of Endourology . 2008;22(8):1681–1685. https://doi. 10.1089/end.2008.0035
22. Sundaram CP, Rehman J, Landman J, Oh J. Hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma with inferior vena caval thrombus. Journal of Endourology. 2002;168(1):176–179. https://doi.10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64855-0
23. Romero FR, Muntener M, Bagga HS, Brito FA, Sulman A, Jarrett TW. Pure laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with level II vena caval thrombectomy. Urology. 2006;68(5):1112–1114. https://doi.10.1016/j.urology.2006.08.1084
24. Lee JY, Mucksavage P. Robotic radical nephrectomy with vena caval tumor thrombectomy: Experience of novice robotic surgeons. Korean Journal of Urology. 2012;53(12):879–882. https://doi.10.4111/kju.2012.53.12.879
25. Patel HD, Mullins JK, Pierorazio PM, Jayram G, Cohen JE, Matlaga BR, et al. Trends in renal surgery: Robotic technology is associated with increased use of partial nephrectomy. Journal of Urology. 2013;189(4):1229–1235. https://doi. 10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.024
26. Long CJ, Canter DJ, Kutikov A, Li T, Simhan J, Smaldone M, et al. Partial nephrectomy for renal masses ≥ 7 cm: Technical, oncological and functional outcomes. BJU International. 2012;109(10):1450–1456. https://doi.10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10608.x
27. Bratslavsky G. Argument in favor of performing partial nephrectomy for tumors greater than 7: The metastatic prescription has already been written. Urologic Oncology. 2011;29(6):829–832. https://doi.10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.05.010
28. Coco D, Leanza S. Robotic radical nephrectomy with vena cava thrombus extraction (RRN-VCTE) for renal cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis of surgical technique and outcomes. Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL. 2024;11(1):5–11. https://doi.10.15586/jkcvhl.v11i1.288
29. Coco D, Leanza S. Von Hippel-Lindau is associated to pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A comprehensive review. Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL. 2023;10(2):13–20. https://doi.10.15586/jkcvhl.v10i2.272
30. Coco D, Leanza S. Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome: Medical syndrome or surgical syndrome? A surgical perspective. Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL. 2021;9(1):27–32. https://doi.10.15586/jkcvhl.v9i1.206
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.