Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose: To compare the trifecta and pentafecta outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) in highly complex renal tumors (RENAL nephrometry score ≥10) using a matched cohort analysis. Methods: Patients undergoing LPN or RPN for renal tumors with RENAL score ≥10 between January 2014 and December 2019 were matched using 1:2 propensity score match analysis based on age, body mass index, gender, laterality of tumor, RENAL score, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score. The two groups were compared for trifecta and pentafecta outcomes. Results: Thirty patients undergoing LPN (Group A) were matched with 60 patients undergoing RPN (Group B). The mean age (standard deviation) was 53.7 (12.9) years. The median (interquartile range) RENAL score was 10 (10–11). In comparison, the mean warm ischemia time in Group A was significantly longer than that in Group B (26.2 vs 23.0 minutes, p = 0.013). The overall complication rate was 36.7% in Group A as compared with 20% in Group B ( p = 0.440). The trifecta outcomes could be achieved in 11 patients (36.7%) in Group A compared with 40 patients (66.7%) in Group B ( p = 0.012). Moreover, 10 patients (33.3%) in Group A and 28 patients (46.7%) in Group B achieved pentafecta outcomes ( p = 0.227). Conclusions: In a matched cohort of patients undergoing nephron-sparing surgery for highly complex renal tumors (RENAL score ≥10), the robotic approach offers a superior advantage in the achievement of trifecta outcomes as compared with the laparoscopic approach. However, both LPN and RPN can achieve similar pentafecta outcomes.
Garg et al. (Fri,) studied this question.