Is robotic radical nephroureterectomy a safe alternative to open approach: The first prospective analysis

dc.contributor.authorMourmouris, Panagiotis
dc.contributor.authorArgun, Omer Burak
dc.contributor.authorTzelves, Lazaros
dc.contributor.authorTuna, Mustafa Bilal
dc.contributor.authorGourtzelidou, Maria
dc.contributor.authorTziotis, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorKural, Ali Riza
dc.contributor.authorSkolarikos, Andreas
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-21T12:34:25Z
dc.date.available2023-02-21T12:34:25Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-01
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To test the efficacy and safety profile of robotic radical nephroureterectomy compared to the open approach. Methods: We enrolled 45 consecutive patients who suffered from non-metastatic, upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma from September 2019 to March 2021 and underwent radical nephroureterectomy. Patients were divided in two groups: group A consisted of 29 patients (open approach) and group B consisted of 16 patients (robotic approach). The factors which were taken into consideration were age, sex, body mass index, tumour size, side and grade, cancer stage, ASA score, operation time, drain removal time, foley time, hospitalization time, estimated blood loss, surgical margins, preoperative and postoperative creatinine, Hct and bladder recurrences. Statistical analysis was performed with the use of SPSS version 26 and p < 0.05 was the cut-off for reaching statistical significance. Results: The mean age in group 1 was 67.12 years and in group 2 68.12 years, whereas the mean body mass index (BMI) in group 1 was 26.54 kg/m(2) and in group 2 25.20 kg/m(2). Operative time was better in group A (124 vs 186 mins p < 0.001) and estimated blood loss were better in group B compared to group A (137 vs 316 ml p < 0.001). Length of stay (LOS) was significantly less in the robotic group (5.75 vs 4.3 days p = 0.003) and the same applied for time required for drain removal (4.5 vs 33 days p = 0.006). Conclusions: Robotic radical nephroureterectomy is a safe and efficient alternative to open approach. It provides a favorable perioperative profile in patients suffering from upper urinary tract carcinoma without metastasis.
dc.description.issue4
dc.description.pages408-411
dc.description.volume93
dc.identifier.doi10.4081/aiua.2021.4.408
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11443/1739
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2021.4.408
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000731875300007
dc.publisherPAGEPRESS PUBL
dc.relation.ispartofARCHIVIO ITALIANO DI UROLOGIA E ANDROLOGIA
dc.subjectRobotic radical nephroureterectomy
dc.subjectOpen radical nephroureterectomy
dc.subjectProspective analysis
dc.subjectComplications
dc.titleIs robotic radical nephroureterectomy a safe alternative to open approach: The first prospective analysis
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
efusinato,+07Mourmouris.pdf
Size:
104.42 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections