Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

PD33-08 COMPARISON OF PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES BETWEEN SINGLE-PORT AND MULTIPORT RETROPERITONEAL ROBOT-ASSISTED PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMIES

2022; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 207; Issue: Supplement 5 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1097/ju.0000000000002584.08

1527-3792

Arnold R. Palacios, Luca Morgantini, Ryan Trippel, Simone Crivellaro, Michael Abern,

Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022PD33-08 COMPARISON OF PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES BETWEEN SINGLE-PORT AND MULTIPORT RETROPERITONEAL ROBOT-ASSISTED PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMIES Arnold Palacios, Luca Morgantini, Ryan Trippel, Simone Crivellaro, and Michael Abern Arnold PalaciosArnold Palacios More articles by this author , Luca MorgantiniLuca Morgantini More articles by this author , Ryan TrippelRyan Trippel More articles by this author , Simone CrivellaroSimone Crivellaro More articles by this author , and Michael AbernMichael Abern More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002584.08AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: In this study, we set out to compare perioperative outcomes between single port robot-assisted partial nephrectomies (SP-RAPN) and multiport robot-assisted partial nephrectomies (MP-RAPN) utilizing a retroperitoneal approach. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of patients who underwent a SP-RAPN or MP-RAPN at out institution between 11/01/2013 and 05/30/2021. We compared the surgical platforms via univariate analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables and χ2 test for categorical variables. RESULTS: 20 SP-RAPN and 42 MP-RAPN were performed utilizing a retroperitoneal approach. Patients who underwent MP were more likely to have higher RENAL scores (4 vs 6; p=0.0084), but baseline characteristics were not significantly different (Table 1). Outcome data is presented in Table 2. Patients that underwent SP-RAPN had a shorter post-operative length of hospital stay (1 vs 2 days; p<0.0001). There were no significant differences in operative time, estimated blood loss, ischemia time, positive margin rate, malignant histology, post-operative complication rate, or Clavien-Dindo complication grade. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience with retroperitoneal SP-RAPN suggests it is safe, reproducible, and provides shorter lengths of hospital stay when compared to MP-RAPN. SP cases were associated with lower post-operative complication rate, although this was not statistically significant. The observed trend of increased ischemia time with the SP platform is likely related to operator learning curve as they adapt to a new system, although these differences were not significantly different. Source of Funding: None © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e555 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Arnold Palacios More articles by this author Luca Morgantini More articles by this author Ryan Trippel More articles by this author Simone Crivellaro More articles by this author Michael Abern More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...