Robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy with extended template lymphadenectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: An outcome analysis

• Published in: Indian journal of urology 2018-07, Vol.34 (3), p.212-218
• Main Authors: Tamhankar, Ashwin, Patil, Saurabh, Ahluwalia, Puneet, Gautam, Gagan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Biopsy; Bladder; Bladder cancer; Cameras; Cancer; Care and treatment; Cell adhesion & migration; Dissection; Lymph node excision; Lymphatic system; Metastasis; Oncology; Original; Patient outcomes; Patient positioning; Robotics; Robots; Surgery; Treatment outcome; Tumors; Urogenital system; Urologic surgery; Urology
• ISSN: 0970-1591; 1998-3824
• DOI: 10.4103/iju.IJU_30_18

Introduction: Robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy (RANU) with extended template lymphadenectomy (E-LND) is the leading treatment option for nonmetastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Due to the rarity of this disease, there is a lack of consensus regarding the best approach and the extent of lymphadenectomy. We report our technique and its initial outcomes from the retrospective evaluation of a prospectively maintained database of 11 consecutive cases of RANU + E-LND. To the best of our knowledge, our series represents the first published experience of this procedure from India. Materials and Methods: RANU was performed in 11 patients (including two patients with simultaneous radical cystectomy) with the da Vinci Xi system. Pelvic and upper ureteric tumors were operated without re-docking or repositioning, using the port hopping feature. For the lower ureteric tumors, the patient was repositioned and the robot was re-docked to ensure completeness of pelvic lymphadenectomy. E-LND was performed in all the patients as per the templates described in previous studies. Results: Median age was 67.5 years (range 52-71). Median console time and blood loss were 170 min (range 156-270) and 150 cc (range 25-500), respectively. Median hospital stay was 3 days (range 2-8). One patient developed paralytic ileus in the postoperative period (Clavien Dindo Grade 1). None had a positive surgical margin and the median lymph node yield was 22.5 (range 7-47). Median follow-up was 9 months during which one patient developed metastatic systemic recurrence. All other patients were disease free at the last follow-up. Conclusions: A robotic approach to radical nephroureterectomy with E-LND is feasible and safe and does not appear to compromise the short-term oncological outcomes as defined by lymph node yields and margin positivity. At the same time, it offers the benefits of minimal invasion and results in swifter patient recovery from this extensive surgery.