0 233

Cited 8 times in

Outcomes in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for imperative vs elective indications

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author나군호-
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-10T00:49:35Z-
dc.date.available2023-02-10T00:49:35Z-
dc.date.issued2021-12-
dc.identifier.issn1464-4096-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/192399-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To assess and compare peri-operative outcomes of patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for imperative vs elective indications. Patient and methods: We retrospectively reviewed a multinational database of 3802 adults who underwent RAPN for elective and imperative indications. Laparoscopic or open partial nephrectomy (PN) were excluded. Baseline data for age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score and PADUA score were examined. Patients undergoing RAPN for an imperative indication were matched to those having surgery for an elective indication using propensity scores in a 1:3 ratio. Primary outcomes included organ ischaemic time, operating time, estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of blood transfusions, Clavien-Dindo complications, conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN) and positive surgical margin (PSM) status. Results: After propensity-score matching for baseline variables, a total of 304 patients (76 imperative vs 228 elective indications) were included in the final analysis. No significant differences were found between groups for ischaemia time (19.9 vs 19.8 min; P = 0.94), operating time (186 vs 180 min; P = 0.55), EBL (217 vs 190 mL; P = 0.43), rate of blood transfusions (2.7% vs 3.7%; P = 0.51), or Clavien-Dindo complications (P = 0.31). A 38.6% (SD 47.9) decrease in Day-1 postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate was observed in the imperative indication group and an 11.3% (SD 45.1) decrease was observed in the elective indication group (P < 0.005). There were no recorded cases of permanent or temporary dialysis. There were no conversions to RN in the imperative group, and seven conversions (5.6%) in the elective group (P = 0.69). PSMs were seen in 1.4% (1/76) of the imperative group and in 3.3% of the elective group (7/228; P = 0.69). Conclusion: We conclude that RAPN is feasible and safe for imperative indications and demonstrates similar outcomes to those achieved for elective indications.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherBlackwell Science-
dc.relation.isPartOfBJU INTERNATIONAL-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.subject.MESHAged-
dc.subject.MESHAged, 80 and over-
dc.subject.MESHBlood Loss, Surgical-
dc.subject.MESHBlood Transfusion-
dc.subject.MESHDatabases, Factual-
dc.subject.MESHElective Surgical Procedures-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHGlomerular Filtration Rate-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHKidney Neoplasms / surgery*-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMargins of Excision-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHNephrectomy / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHNephrectomy / methods*-
dc.subject.MESHOperative Time-
dc.subject.MESHPostoperative Complications / etiology-
dc.subject.MESHPropensity Score-
dc.subject.MESHRetrospective Studies-
dc.subject.MESHRobotic Surgical Procedures* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHWarm Ischemia-
dc.titleOutcomes in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for imperative vs elective indications-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJo-Lynn S Tan-
dc.contributor.googleauthorNiranjan Sathianathen-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMarcus Cumberbatch-
dc.contributor.googleauthorProkar Dasgupta-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAlexandre Mottrie-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRonney Abaza-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKoon Ho Rha-
dc.contributor.googleauthorThyavihally B Yuvaraja-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDipen J Parekh-
dc.contributor.googleauthorUmberto Capitanio-
dc.contributor.googleauthorRajesh Ahlawat-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSudhir Rawal-
dc.contributor.googleauthorNicolò M Buffi-
dc.contributor.googleauthorAnanthakrishnan Sivaraman-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKris K Maes-
dc.contributor.googleauthorGagan Gautam-
dc.contributor.googleauthorFrancesco Porpiglia-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLevent Turkeri-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMahendra Bhandari-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBenjamin Challacombe-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJames Roscoe Porter-
dc.contributor.googleauthorCraig R Rogers-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDaniel A Moon-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/bju.15581-
dc.contributor.localIdA01227-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ00340-
dc.identifier.eissn1464-410X-
dc.identifier.pmid34448346-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bju.15581-
dc.subject.keywordimperative indications-
dc.subject.keywordpartial nephrectomy-
dc.subject.keywordrenal cancer-
dc.subject.keywordrobot-assisted-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameRha, Koon Ho-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor나군호-
dc.citation.volume128-
dc.citation.numbersuppl 3-
dc.citation.startPage30-
dc.citation.endPage35-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationBJU INTERNATIONAL, Vol.128(suppl 3) : 30-35, 2021-12-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.