Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | International Braz J Urol (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382022000300493 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether criteria exist to guide election between the use the three- or four-arm technique in robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) instead of just the surgeon’s preference. Material and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 80 patients submitted to RPN from May 2016 to February 2020. The patients were divided into two groups of 40, the first submitted to the surgical procedure with use of three robotic arms and the second with four arms. The group division was performed independently of the complexity of the cases, age or gender of the patients and laterality of the renal lesions. Peri- and postoperative data were analyzed for comparison between the two groups. Results: Both techniques had similar oncological outcomes (positive tumor margins), renal function preservation (warm ischemia time) and hemorrhagic complications (estimated blood loss and renal artery pseudoaneurysm), with a small difference in the need for blood transfusion, favoring the technique with three arms. Conclusions: The two robotic partial nephrectomy techniques had similar oncological and postoperative outcomes, with minimal perioperative complications. The three-arm technique is safe and feasible regardless of the complexity and size of the tumor. Additionally, the use of the three-arm technique reduced surgery costs by US$ 413.00 per patient. |
id |
SBU-1_179d3234638afe88dc59f57f5752940a |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1677-55382022000300493 |
network_acronym_str |
SBU-1 |
network_name_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series resultsKidney NeoplasmsNephrectomyCosts and Cost AnalysisABSTRACT Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether criteria exist to guide election between the use the three- or four-arm technique in robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) instead of just the surgeon’s preference. Material and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 80 patients submitted to RPN from May 2016 to February 2020. The patients were divided into two groups of 40, the first submitted to the surgical procedure with use of three robotic arms and the second with four arms. The group division was performed independently of the complexity of the cases, age or gender of the patients and laterality of the renal lesions. Peri- and postoperative data were analyzed for comparison between the two groups. Results: Both techniques had similar oncological outcomes (positive tumor margins), renal function preservation (warm ischemia time) and hemorrhagic complications (estimated blood loss and renal artery pseudoaneurysm), with a small difference in the need for blood transfusion, favoring the technique with three arms. Conclusions: The two robotic partial nephrectomy techniques had similar oncological and postoperative outcomes, with minimal perioperative complications. The three-arm technique is safe and feasible regardless of the complexity and size of the tumor. Additionally, the use of the three-arm technique reduced surgery costs by US$ 413.00 per patient.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2022-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382022000300493International braz j urol v.48 n.3 2022reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2021.0495info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSchulze,LucasDubeux,Victor TeixeiraMilfont,José C. A.Peçanha,GustavoFerrer,PedroCavalcanti,Andre Guilhermeeng2022-07-21T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382022000300493Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2022-07-21T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
title |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
spellingShingle |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results Schulze,Lucas Kidney Neoplasms Nephrectomy Costs and Cost Analysis |
title_short |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
title_full |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
title_fullStr |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
title_full_unstemmed |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
title_sort |
Analysis of surgical and histopathological results of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with use of three or four robotic arms: an early series results |
author |
Schulze,Lucas |
author_facet |
Schulze,Lucas Dubeux,Victor Teixeira Milfont,José C. A. Peçanha,Gustavo Ferrer,Pedro Cavalcanti,Andre Guilherme |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Dubeux,Victor Teixeira Milfont,José C. A. Peçanha,Gustavo Ferrer,Pedro Cavalcanti,Andre Guilherme |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Schulze,Lucas Dubeux,Victor Teixeira Milfont,José C. A. Peçanha,Gustavo Ferrer,Pedro Cavalcanti,Andre Guilherme |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Kidney Neoplasms Nephrectomy Costs and Cost Analysis |
topic |
Kidney Neoplasms Nephrectomy Costs and Cost Analysis |
description |
ABSTRACT Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether criteria exist to guide election between the use the three- or four-arm technique in robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) instead of just the surgeon’s preference. Material and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 80 patients submitted to RPN from May 2016 to February 2020. The patients were divided into two groups of 40, the first submitted to the surgical procedure with use of three robotic arms and the second with four arms. The group division was performed independently of the complexity of the cases, age or gender of the patients and laterality of the renal lesions. Peri- and postoperative data were analyzed for comparison between the two groups. Results: Both techniques had similar oncological outcomes (positive tumor margins), renal function preservation (warm ischemia time) and hemorrhagic complications (estimated blood loss and renal artery pseudoaneurysm), with a small difference in the need for blood transfusion, favoring the technique with three arms. Conclusions: The two robotic partial nephrectomy techniques had similar oncological and postoperative outcomes, with minimal perioperative complications. The three-arm technique is safe and feasible regardless of the complexity and size of the tumor. Additionally, the use of the three-arm technique reduced surgery costs by US$ 413.00 per patient. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382022000300493 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382022000300493 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2021.0495 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
International braz j urol v.48 n.3 2022 reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) instacron:SBU |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
instacron_str |
SBU |
institution |
SBU |
reponame_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
collection |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br |
_version_ |
1750318078334337024 |