Comparison of Trifecta and Pentafecta Outcomes between T1a and T1b Renal Masses following Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RAPN) with Minimum One Year Follow Up: Can RAPN for T1b Renal Masses Be Feasible?

Dae Keun Kim, Lawrence H C Kim, Ali Abdel Raheem, Tae Young Shin, Ibrahim Alabdulaali, Young Eun Yoon, Woong Kyu Han, Koon Ho Rha, Dae Keun Kim, Lawrence H C Kim, Ali Abdel Raheem, Tae Young Shin, Ibrahim Alabdulaali, Young Eun Yoon, Woong Kyu Han, Koon Ho Rha

Abstract

Purpose/objectives: To investigate the feasibility of RAPN on T1b renal mass by assessment of Trifecta and Pentafecta rate between T1a and T1b renal mass.

Materials/methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 277 cases of RPN performed from 2006 to 2015. Sixty patients with clinically T1b renal masses (> 4 cm and ≤ 7 cm) were identified, and from 180 patients with clinically T1a renal mass, 60 patients were matched with T1b renal mass by propensity score. Tumor complexity was investigated according to R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score. "Pentafecta" was defined as achievement of Trifecta (negative surgical margin, no postoperative complications and warm ischemia time of ≤ 25 minutes) with addition of over 90% estimated GFR preservation and no chronic kidney disease stage upgrading at 1 year postoperative period. Propensity score matching was performed by OneToManyMTCH. Logistic regression models were used to identify the variables which predict the Trifecta, and Pentafecta ac.

Results: Preoperative variables (age, sex, body mass index, ASA score) were similar between T1a and T1b after propensity score matching. The median R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score was 8 vs 9 for T1a and T1b respectively (p<0.001). The median warm ischemia time was 20.1 min vs 26.2 min (p<0.001). Positive surgical margin rate was 5% vs 6.6% (p = 0.729) and overall complication rate of 13.3%. vs 15% (p = 0.793). The rate of achievement of Trifecta rate were 65.3% vs 43.3% (p = 0.017) and Pentafecta rate were 38.3% vs 26.7% (p = 0.172). For achievement of Pentafecta, R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score (HR 0.80; 95% CI (0.67-0.97); p = 0.031) was significant predictor of achieving Pentafecta. Subanalyis to assess the component of R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score, L component (location relative to the polar lines, HR 0.63; 95% CI (0.38-1.03); P = 0.064) was relatively important component for Pentafecta achievement.

Conclusions: The rate of Pentafecta after RAPN was comparable between T1a and T1b renal masses. RAPN is a feasible modality with excellent long term outcome for patients with larger renal mass (cT1b).

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S, Dabestani S, Hofmann F, Hora M, et al. EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update. Eur Urol. 2015;67(5):913–24. 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.005
    1. Borghesi M, Schiavina R, Gan M, Novara G, Mottrie A, Ficarra V. Expanding utilization of robotic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1b and complex T1a renal masses. World J Urol. 2013;31(3):499–504. 10.1007/s00345-013-1095-2
    1. Choi JE, You JH, Kim DK, Rha KH, Lee SH. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2015;67(5):891–901. 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.028
    1. Aboumarzouk OM, Stein RJ, Eyraud R, Haber GP, Chlosta PL, Somani BK, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2012;62(6):1023–33. 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.038
    1. Hung AJ, Cai J, Simmons MN, Gill IS. "Trifecta" in partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2013;189(1):36–42. 10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.042
    1. Zargar H, Allaf ME, Bhayani S, Stifelman M, Rogers C, Ball MW, et al. Trifecta and optimal perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in surgical treatment of small renal masses: a multi-institutional study. BJU Int. 2015;116(3):407–14. 10.1111/bju.12933
    1. Komninos C, Shin TY, Tuliao P, Kim DK, Han WK, Chung BH, et al. Robotic partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors: complications and functional and oncologic outcomes during a 4-year median period of follow-up. Urology. 2014;84(6):1367–73. 10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.012
    1. Levin A, Stevens PE. Summary of KDIGO 2012 CKD Guideline: behind the scenes, need for guidance, and a framework for moving forward. Kidney Int. 2014;85(1):49–61. 10.1038/ki.2013.444
    1. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–96. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2
    1. Levey AS, Bosch JP, Lewis JB, Greene T, Rogers N, Roth D. A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(6):461–70.
    1. Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E, Kausz AT, Levin A, Steffes MW, et al. National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139(2):137–47.
    1. Kim DK, Komninos C, Kim L, Rha KH. Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Endophytic Tumors. Curr Urol Rep. 2015;16(11):76 10.1007/s11934-015-0552-4
    1. Maddox M, Mandava S, Liu J, Boonjindasup A, Lee BR. Robotic partial nephrectomy for clinical stage T1b tumors: intermediate oncologic and functional outcomes. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2015;13(1):94–9. 10.1016/j.clgc.2014.07.011
    1. Takagi T, Mir MC, Campbell RA, Sharma N, Remer EM, Li J, et al. Predictors of precision of excision and reconstruction in partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2014;192(1):30–5. 10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.035
    1. Porpiglia F, Bertolo R, Amparore D, Fiori C. Margins, ischaemia and complications rate after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: impact of learning curve and tumour anatomical characteristics. BJU Int. 2013;112(8):1125–32. 10.1111/bju.12317
    1. Carneiro A, Sivaraman A, Sanchez-Salas R, Di Trapani E, Barret E, Rozet F, et al. Evolution from laparoscopic to robotic nephron sparing surgery: a high-volume laparoscopic center experience on achieving 'trifecta' outcomes. World J Urol. 2015;33(12):2039–44. 10.1007/s00345-015-1552-1
    1. Komninos C, Shin TY, Tuliao P, Yoon YE, Koo KC, Chang CH, et al. R-LESS partial nephrectomy trifecta outcome is inferior to multiport robotic partial nephrectomy: comparative analysis. Eur Urol. 2014;66(3):512–7. 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.058
    1. Gupta GN, Boris R, Chung P, Linehan WM, Pinto PA, Bratslavsky G. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for tumors greater than 4 cm and high nephrometry score: feasibility, renal functional, and oncological outcomes with minimum 1 year follow-up. Urol Oncol. 2013;31(1):51–6. 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.10.008
    1. Petros F, Sukumar S, Haber GP, Dulabon L, Bhayani S, Stifelman M, et al. Multi-institutional analysis of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal tumors >4 cm versus ≤ 4 cm in 445 consecutive patients. J Endourol. 2012;26(6):642–6. 10.1089/end.2011.0340
    1. Khalifeh A, Autorino R, Hillyer SP, Laydner H, Eyraud R, Panumatrassamee K, et al. Comparative outcomes and assessment of trifecta in 500 robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy cases: a single surgeon experience. J Urol. 2013;189(4):1236–42. 10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.021
    1. Takagi T, Mir MC, Campbell RA, Sharma N, Remer EM, Li J, et al. Assessment of outcomes in partial nephrectomy incorporating detailed functional analysis. Urology. 2014;84(5):1128–33. 10.1016/j.urology.2014.07.008
    1. Lista G, Buffi NM, Lughezzani G, Lazzeri M, Abrate A, Mistretta A, et al. Margin, ischemia, and complications system to report perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy: a European Multicenter Observational Study (EMOS project). Urology. 2015;85(3):589–95. 10.1016/j.urology.2014.09.068

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel