Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorRoaldsen, Marius Håke
dc.contributor.authorLohne, Vetle Dalsø
dc.contributor.authorStenberg, Thor Allan
dc.contributor.authorPatel, Hitendra R.H.
dc.contributor.authorAarsæther, Erling Johan
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-18T13:13:18Z
dc.date.available2024-11-18T13:13:18Z
dc.date.issued2024-09-09
dc.description.abstractBackground - Open partial nephrectomy (OPN) has previously been considered the gold standard procedure for treatment of T1 localized renal tumors. After introduction of robot assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) as an alternative method to OPN, OPN was gradually abandoned at our department. The aim of the study was to retrospectively compare the results of patients treated with either OPN or RAPN for suspected renal carcinoma.<p> <p>Methods - Patients who underwent either open or robotic assisted partial nephrectomy between January 1st 2010 and December 31st 2020 were retrospectively included in the study. Each tumor subjected to surgery was scored preoperatively by the RENAL nephrometry score. Complications within 30 days were assessed according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system.<p> <p>Results - A total of 197 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy were identified; 75 were subjected to OPN and 122 were treated with RAPN. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to age (OPN: 63 years ± 11, RAPN: 62 years ± 10), gender (OPN: 71/29%, RAPN: 67/33%), body mass index (OPN: 28 ± 5, RAPN: 28 ± 5), ASA score (OPN: 2.4 ± 0.6, RAPN: 2.2 ± 0.5), or nephrometry score (OPN: 6.6 ± 1.7, RAPN: 6.9 ± 1.7, p = 0.2). The operative time was significantly shorter in the OPN group (81 min) compared to the RAPN group (144.5 min, p < 0.001). Mean perioperative blood loss was 227 ± 162 ml in the OPN group compared to 189 ± 152 ml in the RAPN group (p = 0.1). Mean length of stay was shorter in the RAPN group (3 days) compared to the OPN group (6, days, p < 0.001). Positive surgical margin rate was significantly higher in the OPN group (21.6%) compared to the RAPN group (4.2%, p < 0.001). There were no differences in the number of Clavien-Dindo graded complications between the groups (p = 0.6).<p> <p>Conclusions - The introduction of RAPN at our department resulted in shorter length of stay and fewer positive surgical margins, without increasing complications.en_US
dc.identifier.citationRoaldsen, Lohne, Stenberg, Patel, Aarsæther. Comparing open and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy – a single institution report. BMC Urology. 2024;24(1)
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 2308117
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12894-024-01586-6
dc.identifier.issn1471-2490
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/35750
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Natureen_US
dc.relation.journalBMC Urology
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2024 The Author(s)en_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0en_US
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)en_US
dc.titleComparing open and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy – a single institution reporten_US
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Med mindre det står noe annet, er denne innførselens lisens beskrevet som Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)