Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes of minimally-invasive surgery for highly complex renal tumors (RENAL or PADUA score ≥ 10): an evidence-based analysis

The primary objective of the current study is to undertake a comparative analysis of the effectiveness and safety of minimally-invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN; including laparoscopic and robotic approaches) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for the treatment of highly complex renal tumors (defin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of robotic surgery 2023-10, Vol.17 (5), p.1917-1931
Main Authors: Li, Xiao-ran, Li, Kun-peng, Zuo, Jia-le, Yang, Wei, Tan, Hao, Wang, Wen-yun, Chen, Si-yu, Ma, Jun-hai, Bao, Jun-sheng, Yue, Zhong-jin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Blood
Body mass index
Cancer therapies
Comparative studies
Data collection
Hospitals
Kidney cancer
Laparoscopy
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Minimally Invasive Surgery
Review
Surgery
Transfusion
Tumors
Urology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The primary objective of the current study is to undertake a comparative analysis of the effectiveness and safety of minimally-invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN; including laparoscopic and robotic approaches) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for the treatment of highly complex renal tumors (defined as PADUA or RENAL score ≥ 10). A comprehensive search was conducted in four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library) to identify relevant studies published in the English language up to April 2023. The current study employed Review Manager 5.4 and encompassed controlled trials of both MIPN and OPN for the treatment of highly complex renal tumors. This study comprised a total of eight comparative trials involving 1161 patients. MIPN demonstrated a significant reduction in length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] − 2.08 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] − 2.48, − 1.68; p 
ISSN:1863-2491
1863-2483
1863-2491
DOI:10.1007/s11701-023-01650-7